Just because you are not breaking the law, it doesn't mean we are going to leave you alone.

So, the first week for the new Government and they have set their stall out regarding snooping on its citizens.

David Cameron has suggested that it's all our fault that extremism has spread and that we have for far too long been passively tolerant. His exact words were:-

'For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens: as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'

Well now those days are over, if they actually existed anyway.

No longer will extremism be tolerated, anybody found encouraging extremism or hate speech, will feel the long arm of the British Government's justice system bearing down on them.

Whether these new laws will be used to justify the stifling of discontent amongst its citizens against the Government, I guess only time will tell.

This is a Daily Mail report, so of course it is primarily aimed at Muslims and Neo-Nazis, but I question the wording used by Cameron on this one. Will we be deemed extremists for speaking out against anything the Government stands for? Will our freedom of speech become more eroded and will our right to protest be removed forever?

Interesting times ahead.

www.dailymail.co.uk... ed

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

I just gotta ask the obvious here.

If they are gonna shake you down either way, why follow the law?

I mean that is the number one carrot for following the law, they stay out of your business.

If they are gonna harasss you no matter what, why not at least deserve it, while most likely turning a profit or some other advantage?

Idiotic circular reasoning being applied over the pond.

I feal for you cousins, fight this idiocy with logic.

originally posted by: johnwick
a reply to: Cobaltic1978

If they are gonna shake you down either way, why follow the law?

I mean that is the number one carrot for following the law, they stay out of your business.

If they are gonna harasss you no matter what, why not at least deserve it, while most likely turning a profit or some other advantage?

That is a good point.
It is so depressing watching a Police State develop by stealth before our eyes. Not just in Britain I might add.
I actually feel sorry for young people today and their future.
The people have now become 'The Enemy'

a reply to: johnwick

I think you raise a valid point. However, to blame the people for the rise in extremism is very rich, particularly coming from a man who ideally would like the U.K to become embroiled in all the M.E problems. It's a straightforward case of denial on his part, but shouldn't surprise anyone from the U.K. After all, this was the man who dodged the leaders debate and still managed to fool the public over the state of the economy.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

It is the very corrupt, lying, power grabbing governments that have caused people to react. Who determines what is extreme? Certainly the atrocities committed by certain radical factions of Islam are extreme. But what of the common person who expresses their beliefs by walking about with a sign saying, "Down with,,,". Is that man now labeled extremist?

For every action there is an opposite reaction.

We are certainly living in times beginning to resemble those of the Inquisition.

Wow, that is some Orwellian *stuff* there. Governments everywhere think they need to control everything...it has nothing to do with safety. It doesn't matter who you put in power anymore they want to retain their power. Over here in the US we have the TPP and Obama. I think you would have been just as screwed if the election had gone the other way. There simply aren't any alternatives to these government control freaks anymore.

I have this visualization of many Brits facepalming themselves right about now. Obviously, it was a political move not to make such a statement prior to the election. Things keep developing faster and faster here in the U.S. and in the U.K.. It seems the more people that wake up and the more damage we do to TPTB, the harder and faster they put things forward. I think it is a signal they are scared plans won't be able to flower.

I hope all the Brits here loudly give this donkey flack.

a reply to: HumansEh

some of us are worried it might become a survival of the fittest setup again

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

So a passive tolerant society only acts and behaves in a manner that is pre-approved by the government?

If it's happening across the pond, it'll soon be here, no doubt.

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel
I have this visualization of many Brits facepalming themselves right about now. Obviously, it was a political move not to make such a statement prior to the election. Things keep developing faster and faster here in the U.S. and in the U.K.. It seems the more people that wake up and the more damage we do to TPTB, the harder and faster they put things forward. I think it is a signal they are scared plans won't be able to flower.

I hope all the Brits here loudly give this donkey flack.

The people here in the U.K did not think about this issue one bit, simply because security was never discussed throughout the election campaign.

There weren't any Terrorist attacks either come to think of it. But, less than a week later, they're priority. Along with reversing the Hunting with dogs ban, the removal of bus passes for the elderly, the removal of winter payments, the attack on disabled children's benefit, the removal of the Human Rights bill, all in the name of Austerity. Are you having a laugh?

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel
I have this visualization of many Brits facepalming themselves right about now. Obviously, it was a political move not to make such a statement prior to the election. Things keep developing faster and faster here in the U.S. and in the U.K.. It seems the more people that wake up and the more damage we do to TPTB, the harder and faster they put things forward. I think it is a signal they are scared plans won't be able to flower.

I hope all the Brits here loudly give this donkey flack.

The people here in the U.K did not think about this issue one bit, simply because security was never discussed throughout the election campaign.

There weren't any Terrorist attacks either come to think of it. But, less than a week later, they're priority. Along with reversing the Hunting with dogs ban, the removal of bus passes for the elderly, the removal of winter payments, the attack on disabled children's benefit, the removal of the Human Rights bill, all in the name of Austerity. Are you having a laugh?

No sir, I am not having a laugh, quite the opposite to be sure. To put my reply another way ... had Cameron said this statement prior to election day, he surely would be gone, or at least I would hope. I have no doubt his idea has been in the works and not something that popped into his head in the last 5/6 days, meaning, he calculated not to make such a statement until after securing the election.

This statement coupled with the scrapping of the human rights act and introduction of the snoopers charter sounds very ominous. Doubt it'd end up 1984 but will grant full power to when introduced.

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel
I have this visualization of many Brits facepalming themselves right about now. Obviously, it was a political move not to make such a statement prior to the election. Things keep developing faster and faster here in the U.S. and in the U.K.. It seems the more people that wake up and the more damage we do to TPTB, the harder and faster they put things forward. I think it is a signal they are scared plans won't be able to flower.

I hope all the Brits here loudly give this donkey flack.

The people here in the U.K did not think about this issue one bit, simply because security was never discussed throughout the election campaign.

There weren't any Terrorist attacks either come to think of it. But, less than a week later, they're priority. Along with reversing the Hunting with dogs ban, the removal of bus passes for the elderly, the removal of winter payments, the attack on disabled children's benefit, the removal of the Human Rights bill, all in the name of Austerity. Are you having a laugh?

No sir, I am not having a laugh, quite the opposite to be sure. To put my reply another way ... had Cameron said this statement prior to election day, he surely would be gone, or at least I would hope. I have no doubt his idea has been in the works and not something that popped into his head in the last 5/6 days, meaning, he calculated not to make such a statement until after securing the election.

Sorry that wasn't aimed at you, more a rhetorical question aimed at this Government. I agree with what you are saying and in fact if it wasn't for the Lib Dems, I am sure we would have had this imposed on us last term.

It appears it was kept quiet as not everybody would have considered something like this would be introduced. I am certain that if Labour had won, they would have been coming up with their own version. Maybe not the scrapping of the Human Rights Bill though.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978
Yeah, ditching the Human Rights Bill is pretty extreme I think too. Well, a lot of what you listed, but that is crazy. It sends a chill as I know a lot of what is done here is done there and what is done there is done here in various forms or fashions. Makes me wonder when the proposal will be uttered here to axe the Bill of Rights ... 2016?

originally posted by: bastion
This statement coupled with the scrapping of the human rights act and introduction of the snoopers charter sounds very ominous. Doubt it'd end up 1984 but will grant full power to when introduced.

Along with boundary changes to reduce parliamentary seats from 650 to 600, rendering it almost impossible for any opposition party to secure a GE win.

The planned prolonged hegemony will, I think, be more passively-aggressive and insidious than anything described in 1984.

originally posted by: teapot

originally posted by: bastion
This statement coupled with the scrapping of the human rights act and introduction of the snoopers charter sounds very ominous. Doubt it'd end up 1984 but will grant full power to when introduced.

Along with boundary changes to reduce parliamentary seats from 650 to 600, rendering it almost impossible for any opposition party to secure a GE win.

The planned prolonged hegemony will, I think, be more passively-aggressive and insidious than anything described in 1984.

Come on people, you know it's true!!

As far as I am concerned, any infringement on personal privacy by lawmakers is a direct result of anyone who took 'Terrorism' as anything more than complete BS, Those that stopped asking questions an parroted what they heard on the MSM. The fact that it is the "norm" to accept what the government and MSM says and the onus is on you to "prove" them wrong, is why we are at the point of no return. This *snip* is gonna happen.