It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

WAR: UK anti-terrorism law approved

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 09:00 PM
link   
After a marathon 30 hour session, the British Parliament hammered controversial anti-terrorism measures into law. The key to getting it through was Prime Minister Tony Blair's willingness to allow Parliament the opportunity to overhaul the legislation in a years time. This passage occurred even as 8 terrorist suspect were released by court order after the old anti-terrorism legislation ruled unlawful.
 



www.cnn.com
LONDON, England (Reuters) -- Britain hammered controversial anti-terrorism measures into law on Friday as eight foreign terrorist suspects, regarded by the government as among the most dangerous men in the country, walked free on bail.

Politicians finally approved Prime Minister Tony Blair's anti-terrorism bill after one of the longest parliamentary sittings in British history -- a 30-hour marathon which started on Thursday morning and ran all through the night.

A deal was reached after Blair promised to give parliament an opportunity to overhaul the legislation next year.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Blair had invested quite a bit of political "capital" to get this through. It is interesting to see that the bill suspends the right to a fair trial making it similar in nature to the U.S. providing. The released suspects are now under "control orders" which requires them to wear electronic bracelets, stay home 12 hours a day, and attend no pre arranged meetings.




posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 09:01 PM
link   
Wow I didn't even realise Blair had more Capitol to use. At least they will be reviewing it and they didn't make it easy either.



posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 09:04 PM
link   
What's really interesting is that Blair's Labour government looks more Tori then the Tories.

Hope that doesn't happen to Australia, if our Labour party goes conservative, i might have to do something crazy & stupid like joining the Greens.


from article
Opponents of the legislation say that goes against 800 years of British tradition, dating from the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215.


Wow!! 800 years, the proposal to not allow a fair trial? Is that necessary? Even during WW2, we never suspended fair trials.

[edit on 11-3-2005 by rapier28]



posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 09:26 PM
link   


i might have to do something crazy & stupid like joining the Greens.


Why would that be crazy and stupid?
Are the greens really that bad in your country? In Canada the Greens are fairly centerist, have some leftist views(socially) and some righty views(economically in some areas not all) You should really check out thier platform.



posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Yes, i think the Greens in Australia need a lot of work compared to the Germans or the Canadians.

They are extreme-left, they propose policies like legalising drug use.

They have no economic policies to speak of.

They even alienate people like me who are centre-left.

(Though they get 7-8% of the vote now, they stealing primary votes from the Labour party)


[edit on 11-3-2005 by rapier28]



posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 09:40 PM
link   
Question:
Is the UK anti-terrorism law equivalent to the Patriot Act I or II?




seekerof



posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 09:45 PM
link   
I take it that question is rhetorical? (if not, apologise in advance)

Yes, it's unfortunate that we are all getting now Right wing parties and Centre-Right parties everywhere now as opposed to centre-right and centre-left.



posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 09:45 PM
link   


They are extreme-left, they propose policies like legalising drug use


What type of drug use? The greens in Canada has not taken a stance on that issue. Those types were forced out of the party and were thusly forced to create thier own party called....[drum roll] the Marijuana Party. BTW I am Pro-Legalisation in the Case of Marijuana and believe all other drug addictions and abuse cases should be term Mental Illnesses and not Criminal(and for the A-Hole predetor dealers life in jail, I'm talking about the Crack/Heroin/Meth dealers not the harmless hippies who who grow the stuff for compassion clubs). Thats just my opinion, just stating it fer the record I do not want to argue the issue
Done so many times beofre and I'm tired of it.

I just do not think it is such a problem in my country and environmental degredation is more important IMO, thats why I vote Green and not Libertarian or the Mary Jane party.

I guess the Libertarians are out for you as well eh? They want to legalise ALL drugs



posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000
What type of drug use? The greens in Canada has not taken a stance on that issue. Those types were forced out of the party and were thusly forced to create thier own party called....[drum roll] the Marijuana Party.


Yeah Marijuana use.

Though here in New South Wales, trials for legal injection rooms have taken place for Heroin addiction etc. I'am not for locking up people addicted for drugs, they should be treated by the state in a specific medical facility, not a jail.

As for Libertarians, believe that a good government is a balanced government who doesn't interfere in Freedom of speech & expression but maintains order through law.

I have always voted for the centre-left Labour party.



posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 02:42 AM
link   


Just hours after the new law was passed, the Home Office (Interior Ministry) said "control orders," the central component of the legislation, would be imposed immediately on the eight men -- described by the government and Britain's most senior police officer as a serious threat to society.

I love things like this. The U.S. and Britain have finally created 1984 albeit 20 years late.

Now both nations can scoop people up, hold them without charges and get laws passed making all legal.


Hooray for suspension of civil rights


This ought to make those mouthy Brits think again about slamming the good ol USA

.

.



posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 06:40 AM
link   
Yeah, terrorism doesn't seem to be going away, think we probably going to be stuck with these laws for a long time. Even if it does go away, i don't think these laws will be repelled, it's too convenient for the government.

1984 indeed.



posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 06:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by rapier28


Wow!! 800 years, the proposal to not allow a fair trial? Is that necessary?




Huh? No one said they weren't allowed to get a fair trial.


And yes, it seems most feel the new law IS necessary. At least for now.




posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Partyof1

Huh? No one said they weren't allowed to get a fair trial.


And yes, it seems most feel the new law IS necessary. At least for now.



If you were being sarcastic then i apologise.

otherwise;



The new law will allow authorities to detain Britons as well as foreigners indefinitely and without charge if it suspects them of terrorism.


So no, no one is entitled to trial at all, let alone a free one.



posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 07:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Partyof1

Originally posted by rapier28


Wow!! 800 years, the proposal to not allow a fair trial? Is that necessary?




Huh? No one said they weren't allowed to get a fair trial.


And yes, it seems most feel the new law IS necessary. At least for now.



You talk BS the UK does not need this new law. Why??? c'mon they would not be that stupid to attack britain, tell me why would they want to bomb the country they live, earn, grow up and get educated in. As for an attack from foreign lands being as the UK is the most watched country in the world i'm sure we would notice something coming inland. MI6, BBC, MI5, MOD. Need I say more.

Why do you really think we need this new law??? This law is very dangerous in the wrong hands. Just look at the US PA1.



posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 08:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hunting Veritas


You talk BS the UK does not need this new law. Why??? c'mon they would not be that stupid to attack britain, tell me why would they want to bomb the country they live, earn, grow up and get educated in.

Why do you really think we need this new law??? This law is very dangerous in the wrong hands. Just look at the US PA1.



Whoa there, settle down


If you read my post, you'll see that I never said that the UK "needed" this law. I stated that it seems most feel the law is necessary. So let's try to keep the abbreviated curse words out of the discussion - it's not polite.

Sure, this law (like many others, really) could be dangerous in the wrong hands. However, millions (like me) don't feel that it currently IS.

As far as: "why would they want to bomb the country they live, earn, grow up and get educated in?". This happens all the time! Assuming ANY country is immune to attack is foolish IMO.



posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 08:44 AM
link   
This law is disgraceful and pointless.

Under this law any one merely suspected of being a terrorist has their freedom of movement and association removed. They are electronically tagged and not allowed to meet with anyone the government doesnt approve. They are not allowed to use mobile phones or the internet.

Now if this is to protect the United Kingdom then these individuals would assumably have to be kept under these "control orders" until they die, you cant release some one you assume will commit terrorism. Does the general public grasp the gravity of the situation we now have? Talk about asleep at the wheel.

No nation should put their trust into politicians when it comes to civil liberties. Politicians shouldnt ask their civilians to trust them with their civil liberties either, they are inalienable and sacred.

Folks, the terrorists have won. The War on Terror is over, we lost. Our Government has dealt the final blow, not against the terrorists, but against us. Our freedoms are no longer protected, they are literally memories. The threat of terrorism has figuratively blown up our civil rights.

How long before we see any one who disagrees with the government or tries to protest about these "laws" put under control orders?

I ask what was wrong with our courts? Why could we fight the IRA in the courts but not Al Qaeda? Secret information and protection of intelligence sources were protected in these courts. Conspiracy to commit Terrorism IS A CRIME, hence prosecute these individuals under that law and give them their day in court, find them guilty and throw away the key.

Protection of sources is not the reason why this law was passed, its simply makes CONTROLLING the populace easier for governments. We're screwed.

p.s. Yes im a mouthy Brit that criticises the USA but let me tell you, the UK government is no damn better. Im ashamed of my Government in its entirety and I freely admit it. You should try it some time.

[edit on 12/3/05 by subz]



posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 12:04 PM
link   
well england...welcome to AMERIKA's new world.
"The law allows terrorist suspects to be put under house arrest or curfew or electronically tagged without charge or trial."
ohh... because of
"The government insists its new law is needed to control a small number of dangerous suspects who cannot be tried because evidence against them is too sensitive to reveal publicly."

what do you bet that, just like the patriot act..it will be used against 'regular' criminals more than it is used against terorists.

hail the all powerful AMERIKA...you will be free even if we have to kill you...it's for your own good you know



dh

posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 06:58 PM
link   
Do I see narry a squeak from the UK lobby
The most appalling law from cartoonised Big Scrotum turning the whole of the British Isles into a potentially surveilled restricted Guantanamo Camp
This most appalling legislation beats almost the Americans and argues for the dismantling of this legislature
Bring 'em down, people

[edit on 12-3-2005 by dh]

[edit on 12-3-2005 by dh]



posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 07:11 PM
link   


The most appalling law from cartoonised Big Scrotum turning the whole of the British Isles into a potentially surveilled restricted Guantanamo Camp


It was anyway, it is just even worse now.



Do I see narry a squeak from the UK lobby


I would squeek, but I am too tired and poorly! I promise I will squeek tomorrow....hang on someone at the door.......Sorry Officer, squeeking is now an offence? Where this tag you say? Turn off my computer? No Half Life 2 or Eve? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

[edit on 12/3/05 by stumason]



posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Who voted these people in, when are the countries going to be reclaimed for the citizens in the name of freedom for all.

These laws take away basic rights and we will find that little glitches in the law allow for anything to happen to people declared terrorists who really arent



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join