Tonight 6.30pm Tues 26 Feb 2008

[david_carnell]

giggirl Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The so called "war against terror" has been used

> as an excuse to pass new laws which erode our

> civil liberties. And it is the thin end of the

> wedge. Once those laws are on the statute book

> they can be used for whatever purpose they can be

> made to fit.

>

> And what is this "war against terror" - our

> parents and grandparents came through two world

> wars for goodness sake.

I'm genuinely torn on this subject and still find myself swayed to both sides of the argument on different occassions. With that clarifier aside, however, I feel I should comment on this.

These laws are not the thin end of any wedge. They can be repealed at any time by any government. At the next election, vote LibDem. They voted against this legislation and it's not difficult to get rid of it.

Secondly, "the war on terror" is perhaps evocative phraseology. However, if you believe that domestic terrorism is not a serious threat to the citizens of Britain then you are very mis-guided. Senior figures in authority believe that a massive terrorist incident in this country is inevitable and is going to happen sooner rather than later. I am inclined to agree.

I don't think this government has always done the right thing when dealing with this threat. Some of the measures enacted are ill-thought out and risk alienating communities whose help we will need to root out terrorists in our midst. But, and this is a big but, to do nothing would be the greatest sin of all. Funding to the security services has massivley increased and police presence at stations and airports is now mandatory. The schism of losing liberties to defend lives is incredibly complex and I think politicians are tasked with an increidbly difficult job in trying to do so.

And the enemies in two world wars dressed in a uniform with big swastika on it. They were quite easy to spot. You also seem to forget the internment of Anglo-Germans on the Isle of Man during the war. The Americans did a similar thing to Japanese-Americans. Desperate times call for desperate measures etc. I don't condone those measures but to imply that civil liberties weren't eroded in the past in periods of national crisis is looking at the past with rose-tinted vision.

[mockney piers]

"They can be repealed at any time by any government. At the next election, vote LibDem. They voted against this legislation and it's not difficult to get rid of it."

Come on DC, this is disingenuous and you know it. Labour seems to be showing no signs of wanting to do so, in fact are still bleating on about extending the period of detention. Conservatives are keeping shtum, and though I almost certainly will be voting liberal to get this legislation overturned, you know as well as I that they ain't going to win.

So it would appear we're stuck with it.

This being a democracy if the people demand it electorally it will happen, but thanks to a steady diet of war on terror guff fed to the Sun/Mail readers of the nation and lots of politics of fear, this ain't going to happen soon either.

"if you believe that domestic terrorism is not a serious threat to the citizens of Britain then you are very mis-guided" (sorry, I'm fisking again)

Quantify serious threat. Do I think there's a high chance that there will be more deaths, yes I do. Do I think those numbers will compare to threat to citizens of drinking, smoking, car use, old people facing hotter summers or unable to heat their homes in winter? Not even close. Probably more people will die from paracetomol usage.

If our laws were good enough for facing the IRA (remember how we agonised over extension of detention without charge to 7 days, and how internment was the biggest propaganda gift we gave the IRA...do we learn nothing?) who were far better organised politically and militarily than our current threat, then why all this knee jerk legislation to the current crop of radicals?

Do I believe that domestic terrorism is a threat to British society and our way of life? Not in the slightest except insofar as we've managed to rollback centuries of progress to gain our citizens rights to free us from tyranny of our rulers.

Those easily spottable nazis managed to kill 50000 civilians with their bombs and yet we had Churchill saying that such threats must NEVER be an excuse to erode the rights of British citizens, so why should our modern leaders, these midgets of statesmanship feel they know better than he?

And as a final aside, the swastika was only sported by the enemy in one world war, in the first one those filthy sausage eating Huns had the temerity to want an empire, imagine that, how evil of them, of course they needed to be stopped at all costs. Imagine if they wandered about the world suppressing rights to self determination, raping resources, killing the locals, putting them in concentration camps ... err. ... emmm.....like what we did.

[giggirl]

What Mockney P said - I agree totally.

Also, just found this on the BBC

"Why did Britain get rid of ID cards after World War II?

During the WWII the ID card was seen as a way of protecting the nation from Nazi spies. But in 1952, Winston Churchill's government scrapped the cards. The feeling was that in peacetime they simply were not needed. In fact they were thought to be hindering the work of the police, because so many people resented being asked to produce a card to prove their identity"

[SeanMacGabhann]

I pity anyone dropping into this thread with it's seemingly innocuous title!

I hesitate to pick up on DC's point after another recent thread - but

Are we in desperate times? I don't believe so. As Mockney says, that's not to say there isn't A threat. But to use the Isle of Man camps as a good example of desperate measures and it being repealed isn't a great idea IMO. That happened because of innate hositility of "Otherness" and not because of any sensible measure. And rights and freedoms are always fought for, never surrenderd

[giggirl]

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I pity anyone dropping into this thread with it's

> seemingly innocuous title!

>

You've got a point there. PeckhamRose! Look what you did.

[mockney piers]

And I hope no one thinks I'm being blas?. Someone very close to me lost someone very close to them on that awful day in July.

But you get on with things and trust the police to do the best they can without giving up ones fundamental beliefs.

In the meantime if I really feared for my life I'd concentrate on looking both ways as I crossed the road, avoid sink estates at night, eat my 5 a day and cut down on my booze intake.

[david_carnell]

It is and it isn't disengenuous. GigGirl made the point that it was a thin end of the wedge and could never be got rid of. My point was that it could be. A the fact that the electoral system prevents the third largest political party getting electoral credibility isn't really the issue. Either it's a big enough deal for people to vote against the government on, or it's not. Iraq was the same. Lot's of people made lots of noise about it but really, when it came down to it, did Labour suffer in the following election. Not really. Oona King got a kicking from her constituency and the father of a dead soldier made Blair look a bit sheepish on the platform; otherwise it wasn't an important enough issue.

As for your point on more deaths from paracetamol or heat death - now who's being disengenuous? Are you implying that more resources should b put into highlighting the health implications of od-ing on painkillers. Goodness knows what the "we hate the nanny state" brigade would think of that one. If a grown adult wants to guzzle a bottle of calpol, let him etc etc.

Your comment on the Provos is more on the money but I'd offer the following clarifications - those with more knowledge on the subject may well set me straight if any of this is incorrect:

The majority of IRA terrorism took place in Northern Ireland, against Northern Irish citizens.

Most IRA attacks on the mainland were aimed at authority figures (politicians or the Royal Family) or organisations (the police, the finance cos in Canary Wharf) not the general public (obviously there are notable exceptions to this - Manchester for example)

Most attacks were preceded by a warning

The current crop of extremists do none of these things. Therefore different measures are needed. The IRA didn't have hundreds of computer disks with thousands of documents on that needed to be analysed during a custodial period. 7 days isn't always enough to do this. Perhaps longer is occasionally needed. Is an independent, politically neutral judicial system able to decide when this would be appropriate? I think it is and would trust them to use a longer detention periods judiciously.

Churchill's personal contribution to the victory in WW2 is debatable and he was turfed out of office at the first chance by the electorate. He was also the first to use chemical warfare on northern Iraqi tribesmen. I wouldn't bandy him about as some totem of political decency just becuase he's highly quotable. So was Oscar WIlde and I wouldn't use him to beat suicide bombers. ;-)

Finally, taking a swipe at the British Empire's track record on human rights is an easy target - I'd expect better from you than the rather simplified polemic of rape and pillage that you describe above.

[PeckhamRose]

SeanMacGabhann Wrote: "I pity anyone dropping into this thread with it's seemingly innocuous title!

giggirl Wrote: You've got a point there. PeckhamRose! Look what you did.

Yeah sorry about that!

But I DID state the date just in case...

I am glad it sparked debate though.

I did not get around to seeing the film when it came out and was sad to see not many people in the cinema last night despite the director Chris Atkins' presence for Q&A after, either. He was nominated for a BAFTA by the way though did not win it.

Incidentally, my role was edited so I remain on the cutting room floor....! But a prestigious cutting room I think.

I'm not surprised at all, my role was distasteful though funny.

After all the discussion about Churchill I was at the Parliament Square mass / lone demonstration playing a spiritualist medium and was filmed at the base of Churchill's statue improvising my socks off, saying I was hearing him saying how appalled he was that Blair had done what he had done - and then I said, "And I think I'm getting Airey Neave too - well, bits of him".

The film was indeed shocking, and sadly has not got USA distribution which is truly sad.

I am sure it would get a lot of interest.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Ah yes....The days of gentlemen terrorists. We'll never see their likes again... let's take a moment to wish for their return

As for Labour not suffering because of Iraq - well what's an electorate to do? Chuck 'em out and replace them with... another party who would cosy up to Bush in exactly the same way. Given that circumstance most people took a punt on other issues I reckon

[mockney piers]

I'm not entirely sure what you are arguing for though David.

Our current leaders actions are ok because Churchill wasn't all he was cracked up to be? Riiiiigght.

We're in danger of getting into a mutual fisk (ewww) but so what if the majority of the attacks were in N. Ireland, they're still British Citizens and, well, people aren't they (oh, Omagh? Phew, for a moment I thought it mattered). Mainland attacks were often indiscriminate, even when aimed at 'legitimate' targets, and those coded warnings were often counterproductive (depending how you see it) and ended up causing more rather than less death and destruction.

I don't believe the new threat is extraordinary somehow. I don't believe we need extra laws and I don't believe we need to live in fear (tanks at heathrow, I mean really). We need to keep debate free and open so as not to drive the disenfranchised into the arms of extremists, and ultimately we need to listen to them.

Do you think we beat the IRA? No, nor do I, the fact that Martin McGuiness is the number two in N Ireland says it all really. Believe it or not we really do need to think about our foreign policy and it's effects much more than we need to think about 90 day detention or what constitutes torture or turning a blind eye to extraordinary rendition.

British Empire may have been a cheap shot, but I thought it a justifiable response to a misunderstanding regards our First World War foe.

And no, I don't think I'm being disingenuous. I really do think the Billions we spent on stupid wars are better invested in hospitals, education, road safety and the things that actually matter to our day to day domestic needs.

*ooh, and I meant allergic reactions to painkillers and accidental ODs, not suicide. Paracetamol has some pretty nasty by-products you know.

* but now I think about it, yes suicide, taboo and the second biggest killer of young men after cars. Today's news shows that we haven't the resources to cope with depression, so everyone's being prescribed drugs that may not really do the job. How about huge investment in mental health?

[mockney piers]

"Ah yes....The days of gentlemen terrorists. We'll never see their likes again... let's take a moment to wish for their return"

Brilliant :)

[david_carnell]

Like I said at the start, I'm not solidly camped on either side of this but so this thread doesn't become a wooly liberal pinko hotbed of hippydom ;-) I think I'll continue to put up some defence of current policy.

Where to start though. Maybe the bits I agree with you on. Tanks at Heathrow - unnecessary political stunt. Foolish scaremongering. Negotiating with Adams, McGuiness et al - productive and beneficial. I'm not romanticising the IRA but I hope we can both see it's a very different enemy now, Sean's sarcasm aside. Now, where we probably differ...

Semantics on this is emotive so bare with me, but Al-Qaeda UK (AQUK) do not want a little independent bit of Britain to live amongst themselves and then leave the rest of us well alone. And to blame this solely on foreign policy is naive. The people who commit these attacks are dedicated to destroying British and Western civilisation as we know it. These people cannot be reasoned or negotiated with. They don't understand nuances of foreign policy debate.

I agree that overseas ventures have been costly and badly directed. That money could have been better spent on all sorts of lovely things but let's be realists momentarily. Sometimes you need to fight - and I think this might be one of those occassions.

I think it was Satre who said "terrorism is awful, but it's the only weapon the poor and oppressed have". These current terrorists are neither poor or oppressed. Merely intent on killing as many as possible.

You asked what am I for? I don't know. I don't believe there is some vast conspiracy by politicians to deprive us of our rights and liberties for their own ends. I believe that AQUK represent the greatest threat to UK national security since the end of the cold war and I think that on occassion unpalatable actions have to be taken in the short term for long term goals. Beyond that, I'm not sure. Even this I'm not 100% on - but I think these arguments need airing.

This isn't a fully thought out, cogent argument I'm presenting here, more a stream of consciousness expressing my unease at what is, I think, a underestimation of the danger presented.

[KalamityKel]

There's times when I wish I was more intelligent or maybe just interested in this subject where I could express my views in more than a couple of words! *looks at david* ;-)

Sorry didn't mean to divert from the subject :-S

[david_carnell]

I'm sure you're very intelligent, Kel. You can be at work and surreptitiously use a computer at the same time without being caught for example!

What do you think though? (1)Does the threat of terrorism bother you? (2)Do you feel your civil liberties are being impinged or (3)that your freedom of speech is being eroded? Answer me. ANSWER ME!! We have ways of making you talk!

One word answers only though please. ;-)

[giggirl]

Lightbulb moment - maybe we should ask those very nice people at Cinema Paradiso to screen the Taking Liberties movie at the EDT some time soon. What do you think?

[KalamityKel]

1) a little - the threat is always going to be there

2) civil liberties? wassat? *hint of sarcasm there*

3) Freedom of speech? See above

;-)

[david_carnell]

giggirl Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Lightbulb moment - maybe we should ask those very

> nice people at Cinema Paradiso to screen the

> Taking Liberties movie at the EDT some time soon.

> What do you think?

Genius. I'm in.

[mockney piers]

Very honest post DC, which I appreciate and admire.

For my two penneths I do believe that many of those in power are mediocre at best. They don't seem to be the most intelligent nor capable bunch. To trust a police force's recommendations after the excesses of the flying squad in the 70s/80s, with the results being the many miscarriages of justice that ensued, and more particularly a police force (that I hugely admire) that has no right to be above criticism following Forest Gate and Stockwell.

Plus politicians don't seem to have much of a grasp on history which is absolutely vital especially if you're going to chuck your orb about the world.

So I think we're more sleepwalking into a becoming a State whose values are becoming corrupted. I don't believe there's a nefarious conspiracy to take away our rights, but that doesn't mean to say the destination may differ. Evil is often banal, and the road to hell is, as they say, paved with good intentions.

Hard fought freedoms seem to have been depressingly easily lost here where we take things for granted and are inclined to trust our leaders. In Spain* the first reaction of the bombs was to get rid of the government, and I find it rather depressing (as we've discussed before) that it barely figured in our subsequent election.

I genuinely and strongly believe that we need a fundamental rethink of politics to attract the best people to serve the country. Those who currently work in Law, banking, art, education or wherever and have a real talent and vision, not just keep repeating the word vision. I have a pretty fundamental distrust and dim view of those who choose to go into politics (this is a broad brush, and of course there are good people).

On the other side I see absolutely no evidence of an AQUK. So how then do we know 'their' intention of destroying western civilisation (which at any rate is unachievable form the outside).

I no more believe the rhetoric of our demamgogues' 'they hate us for our freedom' than any muslim should believe an extremist preacher talking of a 'crusade against islam'.

Mohammed Sidiq Kahn didn't offer random blind hatred aimed at the fall of the west, he had a pretty defined set of grievances, mostly to do with how our society is sitting pretty and had the luxury of not even considering Iraq or Afghanistan an election issue, while our troops and planes kill muslims*. The man was despicable, but some part of me can't help but feel he had a point, just as in the IRA campaign, afraid as I was of going to Harrods, that you know, they had a point.

Blair dismissed it out of hand, and it must be nice to be so assured of ones one right and righteousness when it was pretty much his policies alone that took the country to an illegitimate war.

I'm sorry to go on, especially when the thread was getting a bit lighter, but you know, I can't help myself ;)

* who value freedom more, having living memories of that struggle, lost but ultimately won. Indeed I've had emotional meetings with my own family, my own grandfather being imprisoned for the crime of owning a newspaper.

* and believe me, when a muslim trots out a party line like that, I'll talk about my experience in sarajevo, how grateful those I met were that our troops fed and supplied them at loss to their own lives, or the curious silence over Sudan where muslim militias kill christian civilians. My pedantry is equitable :)

[giggirl]

Hey guys - bargain DVD ?4.99 including delivery at play.com

http://www.play.com/DVD/DVD/4-/3436614/Taking-Liberties/Product.html

[Domitianus]

A major concern that I have is that the various impingements on civil liberties forced through in the current global political situation are NOT designed solely to protect us from current terrorist threat. Rather, they are part of the agenda of a certain type of person who intuitively wants to be able to control others and who would want to introduce such legislation WHATEVER the situation. Gordon Brown is a wonderful example of this type of control-freak who views the chance of government as an opportunity not to serve his population but as an opportunity to forge the state in the shape of his own neuroses.

The idea that legislation once introduced can easily be revoked is naive IMO. The licensing laws were introduced as a transient measure during WW2 (or was it WW1?) and remained on the statute book for the rest of the century. If legislation such as ID cards, or the ability to detain people for 28 days is introduced I think there is roughly ZERO chance of it ever being repealed no matter how global dynamics change.

Remember, just about every piece of legislation passed (unless it repeals previous legislation) is a restrictive not permissive of what we can do and the Labour government under Blair was notorious as one of the most legislative governments in history.

[neiljohns]

As one of the 'very nice' people who help run Cinema Paradiso that certainly sounds interesting. We're slightly stretched at present getting ready for the new season (visit www.paradisofilm.co.uk for details) but I'll talk to the others and see what might be possible.

[neiljohns]

Following up your request to screen Taking Liberties as part of the Dulwich Paradiso Film Club season...

Our March/April season is already planned (see www.paradisofilm.co.uk)but Taking Liberties will definitely be on the list to consider for next season.

If you want to be kept up-to-date with all future screenings just email us at [email protected] (with 'mailing' in the subject) and we'll be happy to add you to the emailing list. Hope to see you at one or more of this season's films!