Blog taken down for reasons of national security

And yours, and yours and Twitter, and Facebook...

The Prime Minister, in an emergency statement to the Commons on the violence, suggested sites such as Twitter could be closed down during periods of disorder to avoid co-ordinated unrest.

Well would you Adam and Eve it? Politicians respond to a problem with a solution that penalises everybody.

How much do they want to take control of the Internet, the last bastion of free speech available to the common man? They already have their grubby fingers in it, they already have their Digital Economy act, but they won't stop anywhere less than full control and censorship.

The rioters use Twitter to organise? Shut it down. They also used the Blackberry messaging service. Shut that down too. Some used Facebook, others used mobile phones.

The politicians don't just want to be able to shut Twitter, they will need control over the whole kit and caboodle to make their plans viable.

And you can't just shut down a website on a whim. If riots break out in the future, they will only be able to close down the web in time if that ability already exists. They need the powers now, to use as and when they see fit.

What about the theory of the slippery slope? If they get the power to control the internet and the mobile communications infrastructure when there is serious civil unrest, what else will they want to use those powers for?

I could make a very long list of reasons why the 'Freedom of the Internet'* bill would be enacted, but to save your time and mine I will pick only one.


The catch all reason for curbing civil liberties. Terrorism is the big scare of the moment, it's all around us. TPTB have even resorted to calling it a 'war'.

The War on Terrorism.

If you declare a war, you have a much bigger scope for dealing with the problem. Anything goes in war, freedom takes a back seat. In a war such as this, a virtual war, if you will, there needs to be no end to it. The war can continue for as long as we the people can be convinced that there still is a threat.

"You allowed us to shut down the internet when there was civil unrest. This is a war people. How can you complain if we do it now?"

When will the internet be back up? When the war is over.

I'll take my tinfoil hat off for a bit now, my head is getting itchy. Besides, there is plenty more in that article to discuss, other than the threat to electronic communications.

Mr Cameron also insisted anyone convicted of rioting should go to jail and promised that reinforced police numbers would be sustained in the coming days.

Yep, they're going to prison alright. A week or two, One day. A lot are being referred to crown court where they can receive a sentence of up to ten years. I'm not deceiving myself that they will, but here's hoping.

Other measures include:

* Calling on councils to use their powers to evict offenders from social houses;

They'll never do it. Uman rights and all that. When they have evicted noisy neighbours they have had to re-house them somewhere else. What do they think they'll do, go out and buy a house?

* Ministers looking into whether wider powers of curfew are needed;

Like the feral buggers give a shit. And who will they apply to? Just the troublemakers or everyone?

* A £20million fund to help high street firms affected by riots;

Comes under the Riot (Damages) Act 1866.

* Businesses very badly hit will be allowed to defer tax payments;

What about individuals?

* Councils permitted to grant business rate relief;

What about council tax relief?

* Bellwin Scheme of emergency support to councils enacted;


* £10million recovery scheme to help town halls in clean-up;

That should be paid for out of the collective assets of those convicted of rioting, if any.

* Government to meet immediate costs of housing families left homeless;

Does that include those evicted as above?

* Gang injunctions scheme to be extended across the UK;
* Ministerial group to prepare an action plan on gang culture.

How about grass roots social plans to stop these kinds of people being bred? Proper education, real discipline, no benefit dependency etc, etc.

He (Mr Milliband) also questioned the Government's plans to scale back the use of CCTV as part of its civil liberties drive, stressing it must be clear there is no affect on justice.

Watching every citizen go about their daily lives has nothing to do with justice.

Labour's Malcolm Wicks was among many MPs who called for a rethink of cuts in police numbers.

He said: 'The people in that Croydon war zone, because that's what it was, were making the plea "where were the police?"

'For hour after hour after hour, people were free to pillage and loot with no uniformed officers around.'

As I understand it there are no plans to cut police numbers. The plan is to cut the police budget. That doesn't need to cut the numbers of officers on the streets, you just need to bin anyone with equality or diversity in their job title to make up the extra cash.

Besides, this argument is moot. The cuts have not gone ahead yet. People in Croydon were not asking "Where are the police?" because they have all been cut, it was because they had been told to stand and observe.

Police were ordered to 'stand and observe' rioters as they laid waste to London's streets instead of confronting them, it was claimed today.

Scotland Yard insiders have revealed teams were frustrated at their inability to wade in and arrest troublemakers while they looted and burnt out shops.

They had apparently been told to try and contain any violence but not to haul away offenders who would instead be identified through video footage later, according to The Times.

You wonder where the police were? They were told not to get involved. This hands off approach, relying on CCTV evidence to be used later is probably in a small way attributable to the Ian Tomlinson fiasco and in a larger way attributable to the fact that most of the people involved in these riots have been given the 'victim' label by 13 years of socialism, and could probably get compo if the coppers interfered with them. If any harm would have come to a protester at the hands of the police, the coppers involved would have been tried and convicted on Youtube. This, and so soon after the death of Mark Duggan, which hasn't yet been resolved and is the catalyst for the first disturbances, puts the police in such a delicate situation they were impotent to act.

I am no big fan of the police, but when thugs take to the streets and riot just for kicks I am happy for them to get stuck in.

The rioters hit the streets because they know there will be no consequences and the police prove them right.

This country has gone down the crapper.

*That isn't real, I made it up. Notice how they use words like freedom in a bill when they mean the exact opposite?


Michael Fowke said...

Bucko said...

Anonymous said...

Smoking Hot said...

JuliaM said...

Bucko said...

Michael Fowke said...

Bucko said...