Another victory for the terrorists

According to Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson:

The threat of terrorism in the UK is at its most dangerous level for three years. 

I disagree. I think the terrorist threat in the UK is at an all time low.
I mean why would they bother with us any longer? As long as police chiefs keep issuing statements like this they are doing the terrorists job for them.

The purpose of terrorism is to terrorise. To scare people and make them change their way of life. The police and government are doing their best to scare the population. They are doing their best to change their way of life by taking away their liberty.

Why would a terrorist risk bringing bombs and guns into the country? The population is scared enough already. If the fear drops a little, all they need to do is mail a toner cartridge to someone and the scaremongering will begin all over again.

Who needs AK47s and semtex when a spent ink cartridge will do the job at a fraction of the cost with no risks?

He said terrorism remained a persistent and enduring tactic that was "global, diverse and sometimes unpredictable".
There had been a "dangerous resurgence" in the threat from Republican groups, he told security experts in London.
And people must also be alert to right-wing extremism as well as the broader threat from al-Qaeda, he added.
 It's not just Al-Qaeda anymore, people must be getting bored with that one. Now we've got to start worrying about the Irish again? I don't think they will be to concerned with Independence from the UK when they have just sold their souls to the EU.

And whats this about right wing extremism? Are the EDL a terrorist group now? Are we maybe referring to anyone who is sick of Islam encroaching on Britain?

The commissioner said previous chief police officers had "strayed inadvertently and perhaps unintentionally" into the debate around counter-terrorism powers but added he would leave that task to politicians.
He said police should "inform the debate" about control orders, use of stop-and-search powers, pre-charge detention and DNA retention but suggested it was not his role to interfere in the decision-making process.
Their role may not be to interfere in the process, but I see no evidence of them "informing the debate", they just sit back and lap up the extra powers. Correct me if I am wrong but when did you ever hear a police chief say we don't need control orders, pre charge detention and DNA retention because they don't work, they stifle liberty and they remove public trust in the police?

The removal of liberty goes much further than the big three mentioned in the article. How about:

28 day detention without charge.
Rampant CCTV
ANPR cameras.
Stop and search
Section 5 of the public order act.
Airport scanners

Feel free to add to the list, it's endless.

"I respect those that have to make these difficult decisions and I am clear about one thing - this is difficult territory," he said.
"These are fine judgements and there are no black and white answers, no absolutes - only shades of grey."
 I have a black and white answer: Remove liberty, the terrorist wins.
Oh, I have another: Scare the public yourself, the terrorist wins.

Democratic nations must try to find ways to starve the terrorist and the hijacker of the oxygen of publicity on which they depend.
Margaret Thatcher
 She knew.


D-Rex said...

Bucko said...

Anonymous said...

JuliaM said...

Bucko said...