Sorry, but Abu Qatada deserves the compo
‘PREACHER of hate’, ‘truly dangerous individual’, ‘Osama Bin Laden’s ambassador in Europe’; if rhetoric alone were sufficient to secure a criminal conviction, Abu Qatada would currently be in the early years of a very long stretch. Luckily for all of us that live in Britain, any amount of declamation or hearsay is not enough to put somebody behind bars.
Yes, of course this man’s openly expressed views are utterly odious and utterly repugnant. However, until the Thought Police do finally get to run the show in Airstrip One, to endlessly reiterate that undeniable point is to miss what is at stake, namely the quaint insistence that the same rules must apply to all.
Who else is to blame?
The former head of the MI5, Stella Remington, is all over the press today:
It would be better that the Government recognised that there are risks, rather than frightening people in order to be able to pass laws which restrict civil liberties, precisely one of the objects of terrorism: that we live in fear and under a police state.
The fact that this government has exploited terrorism fears to curtail our civil liberties is… well, obvious. But it’s no use just blaming the government, there’s a whole industry of newspaper columnists, think-tanks, writers, bloggers and general wingnuts who have also contributed to this state of affairs because of their obsession with finding Islamists Under The Bed.
Who do you think is also to blame? I’ll start with the easy ones: Melanie Phillips and Douglas Murray.
Snapping coppers
Yet another one for the government’s ‘helping ourselves to your liberties’ file:
The British Journal of Photography reports that from February 16, the thrill that is photographing coppers acting like arses will be taken from us by new laws ‘that allow for the arrest – and imprisonment – of anyone who takes pictures of officers ‘likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism’.’
The BJP continues:
‘A person found guilty of this offence could be liable to imprisonment for up to 10 years, and to a fine.
‘The law is expected to increase the anti terrorism powers used today by police officers to stop photographers, including press photographers, from taking pictures in public places. continue reading… »
Binyam Mohamed: Miliband should release the report
Binyam Mohamed may or may not have received firearms and explosives training from al Qa’eda or fought alongside the Taliban in Afghanistan. He may or may not have been involved alongside Jose Padilla in a dirty bomb plot that may or may not have existed.
If there is evidence of involvement in conspiracy to murder and commit terrorism – and those are the charges Mohamed faces – it is right that the matter be brought before a court. If he is found guilty, it is right that he be punished.
None of this is in dispute. Yet the very same first principles underline that Mohamed, like any person standing in the dock accused of any crime, is entitled to justice. Even if the argument from the ABCs of jurisprudence were not so wholly persuasive, brute pragmatism points in the same direction too.
continue reading… »
Making silly comparisons between Israel-Palestine and Sri Lanka
Suddenly, certain people are interested in the Sri Lankan conflict. That’s not because they’re generally interested in highlighting human rights abuses by the SL government or the LTTE’s brutality, but because it offers a cheap shot as a comparison with the outrage the Gaza invasion to the relative silence over SL. Apparently it illustrates how evil the “anti-imperialist left” is.
This is the point made by David T on Harry’s Place, who usually hates making comparisons because it implies “moral equivalence” but has made an exception here for the required cheap shot.
So why might the outrage in Britain over Gaza be higher profile than the conflict in Sri Lanka?
How about this:
continue reading… »
Anti anti war
A few thoughts on yesterday’s Gaza rally at Trafalgar Square (photo link at the end):
Actually, my main thought about yesterday’s rally pertains to the lack of inspired political leadership we have on this, and so many other, issues. I have a great deal of sympathy for the people of Gaza, but absolutely none for the self-appointed champions of their cause at this end. Absorbing their rhetoric is a bit like inhaling cement. I stand at protest after protest and wonder why the far left simply can’t connect with the human race, or learn.
But anyway – this is meant to be a brief report, not a pointless bitch, so let’s have a bit on the day’s speakers:
Lindsey German – a woman I keep thinking I want to admire for her intellect and commitment – graced us with a speech that I interpreted as a bloodthirsty ode to Hamas’ right to pursue its end of the nightmare: “This ceasefire is not a ceasefire in any meaningful sense if the Palestinians don’t have the right to defend themselves… they have to have that right to defend themselves when they are under such attack… self defence is no offence, and that applies to the people of Gaza more than to anyone else in the world today…” etc – further proof (as if we needed it) of the SWP’s genius for missing the point entirely as it sprints to salute extremism. continue reading… »
Justice for Hich
Lib Con has picked up on the ongoing case of Hicham Yezza (Hich to his friends and supporters) on a couple of previous occasions in daily news round-ups, but events over the last few of weeks necessitate giving the story a bit more detailed coverage.
And we need your help in highlighting this.
In May 2008, Hich, an Algerian national who’s lived and worked in the UK for more than decade, was arrested at his office at Nottingham University’s School of Modern Languages under the Terrorism Act 2000, as was his friend, Rizwaan Sabir, a postgraduate student researching terrorism at the university’s School of Politics and International Relations.
As for the events leading to their arrest, it emerged, several days after they were arrested, that Sabir had downloaded an alleged Al Qaeda training manual from the website of the US Department of Justice, where it had been openly available since December 2001. Sabir obtained the document in question, which had already been extensively edited/censored by the US DoJ before publication, in order to use it in his research and had done nothing more with it than forward it to Hich for printing to save himself a few quid.
For this ‘crime’ both were arrested and held by the police for six days before being released without charge, at which point Sabir was free to return to his studies, while Hich was immediately rearrested on Immigration charges and, a mere three days later, made subject to a fast-tracked deportation order which was scheduled to be executed on June 1, a mere eight days after it was issued – and all this despite Hich having publicly declared his intent to fight the charges against him.
continue reading… »
How does Hillary Clinton matter?
I’ve avoided writing anything about the mechanics of the transition for a number of reasons. First, until yesterday, only a few of the major appointments had been announced, and nobody’s time would’ve been enriched by reading post after post of hyped-up speculation. Second, I think it’s mistaken to think we can interpret what these appointments will mean for the policy content of Obama’s presidency; Rahm Emanuel might stalk the political centre like an obsessive pitbull, but one can’t imply from Obama appointing him Chief of Staff that this herals a retreat to the cautious Clintonomics of the 1990’s. His presidency will be judged by actions in office, not by what comes before.
But the blogosphere abhors a vacuum, and when there’s hits to be had, and millions of eager tag surfers demanding to know what it all means, it’s not surprising that my silence hasn’t been shared by the leading commentators. In this rarefied world, there are three distinct interpretations of the decisions made so far. There’s the ‘liberal overboard!’ argument pursued by Chris Bowers, who opines that Obama’s already begun to betray progressives with his appointments. Then there’s the ‘get a gip’ retort from Glenn Greenwald, who insists that he’s never been a true blue progressive, and is merely picking people who are moderate technocrats like himself. And then there’s the third way favoured by E.J. Dionne, whose well-sourced piece argues that the supposed ‘choice’ between the progressive and centrist policy factions is a false one, and Obama is more likely to govern using a synthesis of both.
The finest press in the world
ARE THEY BRITISH?*
*No.
ARE WE GOING TO APOLOGISE FOR SUGGESTING UP TO 7 OF THEM WERE?*
*No.
All images via 5 Chinese Crackers, who has more commentary.
‘Censorship’ I don’t mind
The Independent wrote an editorial on Monday arguing that ‘Censorship is not the answer’, in response to the news that: “news outlets should be prevented by law from reporting stories the Government judges to be against national security interests.” The paper even went as far as comparing it to 42 days legislation.
Let me explain what is actually going on here. The secret service, police and Home Office are supposed to have established a protocol in publically talking about terrorism related raids and arrests. This came after criticism that various agencies were leaking information about raids to the media to further their own agenda. Anyone remember the idiotic rumours in the national press when Forest Gate raids took place? There have been more since, “terror in the skies” etc, and the alleged plot to kill a Muslim soldier. Various papers including the Telegraph and Sun have even had to pay out for calling people terrorists when they weren’t.
So the government is finally getting its act together and putting forward legislation that would stop the media from pouncing on unsubstantiated rumours based on “anonymous sources” when it relates to terrorism related threats. Given its hard to plug holes, since the press use almost anyone as a “legitimate source”, this is a sensible move. It would not only stop crazy theories, but also prevent people being accused of crimes that have yet to be proven. The system of self-regulation doesn’t work and the Press Complaints Commission is a toothless waste of space.
Surprise surprise then, that newspapers oppose any such restrictions. Newspapers sell more when terrorism is on the front page, even if a few weeks or months after the event they quietly declare on page 37 that it amounted to very little. The Indy’s attempt to compare it to 42 days is a joke. This move should be welcomed.
So what was wrong with 42-days?
The real issue with 42 days is that the Government has failed to make a convincing case for extending detention without charge by any number of days, let alone 42 – and its ‘arguments’, such as they are, are equally applicable to indefinite detention, which (strangely) isn’t on the table – yet it continues to press the issue.
Any proposal to extend this period smacks of an attempt to outflank the other parties. Opponents have been accused of “playing politics” and “trivial grandstanding” – well, six weeks detention isn’t trivial, and caring about the rights of suspects isn’t playing politics.
The argument that there are lots of mobile phones, computer disks, paperwork etc to examine seems a little specious: we know from computer analysts that the police aren’t particularly selective, that they seem to prefer fishing expeditions; also, we don’t need to hold someone while we examine their effects, and we don’t need to return this evidence after 28 or 42 days. This seems more of a question of man-hours and being more clever about searches. As for encryption, apparently you can forget about breaking decent encryption in a reasonable amount of time, so that’s equally an argument for 42 years as it is for 42 days.
Geoff Hoon – unrelenting saviour of mankind
What would we be without people like Geoff Hoon standing up for us, protecting us in our eternal hours of need?
In weeks where the government is at least trying to appear like they’re getting rid of bullshit policies that have only drawn fierce criticism, Geoff Hoon is clearly the man tasked to buck the trend, to show that while the backtracking may be happening in practice to some degree (though clearly is nothing more than a reorganisation of strategy), that there can be no denying that this government is still absolutely the toughest kid on the block when it comes to punching out those terrorist bullies.
From yesterday evening’s Question Time, Geoff Hoon says:
“If they are going to use the internet to communicate with each other and we don’t have the power to deal with that, then you are giving a licence to terrorists to kill people” … “The biggest civil liberty of all is not to be killed by a terrorist.”
This is the mentality of our government, a mentality that keeps adapting and trying to implement their insane plans by any means possible, a mentality that says “Sit down, shut up, we’re doing all of this for your benefit”. It’s a dangerous one for sure, once you start saying that you’d “go a long way” to stop terrorism, to the level of giving the green light to mass (and under this government, insecure) data storage on our lives, where do we stop?
Call it paranoia, but this is the sort of question that needs asking in these times. Slowly, slowly we’re seeing more and more liberties leaked in the name of “Terrorism”, slow enough that it seems that little fuss is caused.
Indeed we have to perhaps be thankful that Hoon makes an ass out of himself with his language. Terrorists can communicate over the internet so we have to have it monitored? We already monitor phone calls…but I suppose next on the list of things to achieve a way of retaining communication details not transmitted through technology. I’m not sure I would be surprised if Labour did turn around and ask to have all of our personal conversations in the street to be recorded, if they could only find a way to make it come in at the right price.
US election: Obama and McCain shirk discussion of Guantánamo and executive overreach
While pundits have been busy analyzing Friday’s Presidential debate, no one has been talking about a crucial issue that has disappeared from the election campaign since Barack Obama won the Democratic nomination in August, even though it is absolutely central to the complaints about the Bush administration’s behaviour over the last seven years.
The issue is unfettered executive power, and it has been manifested, to the horror of the world, and the dismay of Americans who pride themselves on being a nation founded on the rule of law, in the endorsement of torture as official US policy, the transformation of the CIA into an organization that has run a colossal “extraordinary rendition programme” and a network of secret prisons around the world, and the detention of thousands of prisoners without charge or trial in a legal black hole between the Geneva Conventions and the US court system.
In Guantánamo, Afghanistan and Iraq, over 20,000 prisoners in US custody are held neither as Prisoners of War, who would be protected from “humiliating and degrading treatment” and coercive interrogations by the Geneva Conventions, nor as criminal suspects who will be tried in a US court. The only trials put forward by the government — the Military Commissions at Guantánamo — are so tainted by accusations of pro-prosecution bias and the suppression of exculpatory evidence that the administration is fighting a losing battle to establish their legitimacy, nearly seven years after they were set up by Dick Cheney and David Addington. continue reading… »
Why Labour Voters Ought to Think Again
Yeah, I figured that headline would get the attention of some of you. Cory Doctorow has posted what it’s like to be on the sharp end of Labour’s current policies. Because I know that some of you won’t be arsed to click the link, I’m going to copy and paste.
Earlier this year, I married my British fiancée and switched my visa status from “Highly Skilled Migrant” to “Spouse.” This wasn’t optional: Jacqui Smith, the British Home Secretary, had unilaterally (and on 24 hours’ notice) changed the rules for Highly Skilled Migrants to require a university degree, sending hundreds of long-term, productive residents of the UK away (my immigration lawyers had a client who employed over 100 Britons, had fathered two British children, and was nonetheless forced to leave the country, leaving the 100 jobless). Smith took this decision over howls of protests from the House of Lords and Parliament, who repeatedly sued her to change the rule back, winning victory after victory, but Smith kept on appealing (at tax-payer expense) until the High Court finally ordered her to relent (too late for me, alas). continue reading… »
Surprises from the airline plot
There will be more than a few surprised people tonight, both in the media and outside it, at the verdict reached by the jury in the “liquid explosives” trial. The case, after all, had been presented, as George Tenet famously said, as a “slam-dunk”. Here were 8 Muslim extremists, caught red-handed with quantities of hydrogen peroxide, used by both the 7/7 and 21/7 bombers in their attacks, having recorded “martyrdom videos” and with apparent plans for the blowing up mid-flight of an unspecified number of transatlantic planes.
There were shrieks of initial incredulity then horror from the press, all liquids in containers above 100ml were banned from planes as a precaution, with mothers having to taste their babies’ milk, apparently as a result of claims that the bombers were prepared to blow up their children and use their bottles as containers for the explosives. This last claim, as Craig Murray notes, was nonsense.
continue reading… »
My MP just doesn’t get it
Sorry to butt in here, team, but thought I would take a moment to appraise you of an exchange we’ve had with our nobody Labour MP Joan Ruddock on the 42 days’ detention vote. Thought I might as well share this correspondence, so that you also could kill a few moments on a Friday savouring the kind of limp response former Labour voters get when they approach their local Brownite buttkissing MP on issues of real significance… continue reading… »
In the interests of balance: Why we shouldn’t support David Davis
What David Davis did today was not unprecedented, but it was something quite rare. However, I would urge caution on rushing headlong to leap into bed with him and give him our support.
continue reading… »
42 days is dead
I have a strong feeling that the government’s plans to extend pre-charge detention to 42 days, which we’ve been running a campaign against, is dead in the water.
There are two reasons for my optimism.
continue reading… »
Gangs and terrorists
John Kerry, the former Presidential Candidate for the Democrats in 2004, was ridiculed when running for the White House because he compared terrorists to criminals. Whatever the merits of the case that some states encourage terrorism, Kerry may have been right to point to the similarities between terrorists and criminals. Both in the fact that it may be impossible to eradicate terrorism finally, and as a way of understanding the structure of terrorist movements.
This can all be illustrated if we turn to a recent Congressional Research Service report on the subject of some Latino Gangs that are increasingly worrying both the US and Central American governments.
You can read articles through the front page, via Twitter or rss feeds.
» How bad is the feline obesity crisis?
» Why don’t MPs pay back tuition fees instead of increasing ours?
» Obama is right to slam BP – and why capitalists should too
» Why does Phillip Blond see civic cohesion as a security issue?
» So what if the Labour candidates went to Oxbridge?
» Last night’s Labour hustings: will it get interesting or turn to torture?
» It’s now down to Ken to win London for Labour
» The Labour people need
» Blog Nation: what would you like to see discussed?
» The Labour leadership’s token contender.. and it’s not Diane Abbott
» In defence of these fraternal nominations
|
66 Comments 20 Comments 13 Comments 10 Comments 18 Comments 4 Comments 25 Comments 49 Comments 31 Comments 16 Comments |
|
LATEST COMMENTS » Blackberries posted on Complete tits » Shatterface posted on How bad is the feline obesity crisis? » Shatterface posted on Complete tits » McDuff posted on Why I'm defending Ed Balls over immigration » damon posted on Complete tits » Sunny Hundal posted on Complete tits » sunny hundal posted on Why don't MPs pay back tuition fees instead of increasing ours? » Lee Griffin posted on The Labour leadership's token contender.. and it's not Diane Abbott » dan posted on Defend the urban fox! » Richard W posted on Boris rise for Living Wage left of Labour » Julian Swainson posted on How many cabinet MPs went to private schools? » sally posted on Complete tits » Joanne Dunn posted on How many cabinet MPs went to private schools? » Lovely Lynnette Peck posted on How many cabinet MPs went to private schools? » Nick posted on Why don't MPs pay back tuition fees instead of increasing ours? |
