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.

 

Anarchists should be reported, advises Westminster anti-terror police.

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   
So now it seems Anarchists are up there with Islamic extremists as potential terror threats to the UK


This was the surprising injunction from the Metropolitan Police issued to businesses and members of the public in Westminster last week. There was no warning about other political groups, but next to an image of the anarchist emblem, the City of Westminster police's "counter terrorist focus desk" called for anti-anarchist whistleblowers stating: "Anarchism is a political philosophy which considers the state undesirable, unnecessary, and harmful, and instead promotes a stateless society, or anarchy. Any information relating to anarchists should be reported to your local police."


www.guardian.co.uk...

What is it with our society that we label anyone with opposing beliefs a terrorist? As much as the black bloc tactics of Anarchists caused some vandalism in London, it hardly puts them on the same level as terrorist imo.




posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 11:27 AM
link   
By their ever expanding definition, i think we are all terrorists one way or another.
Great stuff.



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 11:35 AM
link   
I think you are all to late, From Arsse.co.uk..


One of THEM (a genuine Irishman) was on an undercover op in the South. He’d been there about a month and was getting in with the local IRA members.
This particular day he turned up at the pub where they all met and had just ordered a drink when two men walked up to him and said, “Your mother’s very ill in hospital, we’ll take you to see her. The car’s outside”.
‘Oh, #’ the thought ‘I’m dead’.
He got into the car and was driven to a hospital where his mother really was in bad way.
Turning to the two IRA men he said, “How long have you known?” They grinned at him and answered “Since the day you arrived. This undercover stuff is fun, isn’t it?”

Think about it...... Fox,



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   
The public have the right to choose their politics without the interference of the police. Where did the police get the authority from to decide what political party members of the public could select their political beliefs from?

If the police get away with this they can label anyone with alternative political views an anarchist - which with their record is not beyond the realms of probability.

Anti-terror policing is very hard and dangerous but, if we tolerate having Muslim politicians whose religion many see as an incitement to terror in order to get their political way, how do you say an Anarchist should not be allowed to have their say. That point might not be 'pc' for some but with Muslims perpetrating the majority of terrorism in the world, its a fair point.

I'm surprised its taken the Anachists so long to raise their angry heads with what has happened politically over the last 15 years or so. The old idea of the two party swinging politics has had its day. How many people truly relate to any of our Front Bench millionaires club today? (although I was impressed with Louise Mensch) We all know that whoever foots the bill for a politician's election trail, thereby aiding them to get elected to the Commons, totally pulls their strings. In America certain lobbies fund over 60% of the electorial trail and that's why the lobbyists get their way there every time.

Our politicians mostly seem very tired and completely lacking in any inspirational or clever ideas for Britain's future. Not one word, when the banks squandered their businesses, was uttered by a single politician saying - Wait, spend that tax money in generating new jobs, businesses and updating industries so we can work our way out of difficulty. Let some of the banks fail it will teach them a lesson. Our ghastly politicians gave our taxes away to the bankers who a week or so ago, whilst Murdoch and son was disgusting us and thoroughly booring us all to death, awarded themselves billions of pounds in bonuses - hardly a word got out about that though.

The good thing about having people like the odd anarchist is that they have new ideas and its ideas and ingenuity we need not the tired lollylocks we have languising in our Houses of Parlaiment. You can't blame people for wanting something new to vote for.

Today our politics really serve the lobbyists and the public can go whistle. Hardly anything going on politically makes any sense. We have Hague squeeling to get into Syria yet silent about other similar countries and no-one tells us the public why any of its actually our business - but one can look and see who lives next to Syria.

If anyone wonders why Anarchists are coming into the British political equation its quite obvious. The Brit public don't feature in current British politics and they are looking for someone new to vote for.



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 12:45 PM
link   


ANARCHY in the UK!!!!


WHOOOOOHOOOOOO



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   
Anarchism is a political philosophy which considers the state undesirable, unnecessary, and harmful, and instead promotes a stateless society, or anarchy.

So what's wrong with the above statement again?

Lets face it, the state doesn't really have a stellar track record, does it now!


Bottom line, the state fears the people, because if we put our collective heads together, we could remove the whole damned lot of them.



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 12:55 PM
link   
any time you see something against the establishment, it will be coincided a a threat,for it does tell TPTB that your time is up, and that makes them afraid, that they will lose control of the masses. It is an attempt to silence the voices of freedom, free thought, and free will.



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Britguy
Bottom line, the state fears the people, because if we put our collective heads together, we could remove the whole damned lot of them.

Yeah, try that. It's working so well in Somalia. The 'stateless' people are having a great time.



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by FOXMULDER147
 


I somehow doubt the politics of Somalia bear little resemblence to the UK. We'd also be unlikely to attract US drone and bombing attacks as a result of civil unrest, unlike Somalia too.


Seriously? Somalia?



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 01:13 PM
link   
Criminalizing belief and opinion?

Yep. Fascist Police State.



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 01:38 PM
link   
I often wonder if true, civil anarchy is not the logical progression of government in a very civilized society....IE one step PAST democracy.

What do they mean by anarchy? I'd like to see that defined. Do they mean people that like no govt at all, or people that like just the minimum required? Or do they mean people that don't like corporate political power taking over congress - because really, that's the way I've seen it applied lately.

I'm becoming more and more distrustful of these labels that govt. is imposing on people.



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 02:04 PM
link   
I'll always be an anarchist at heart.....unfortunately there's one big problem with anarchy.......people!

There will always be someone seeking to exploit or bully someone else for their own personal gain.

Hopefully one day we'll be ready for it.

Anarchists have always been targetted by the authorities, check out the 'Persons Unknown' trial in 78/79.




posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
So now it seems Anarchists are up there with Islamic extremists as potential terror threats to the UK


This was the surprising injunction from the Metropolitan Police issued to businesses and members of the public in Westminster last week. There was no warning about other political groups, but next to an image of the anarchist emblem, the City of Westminster police's "counter terrorist focus desk" called for anti-anarchist whistleblowers stating: "Anarchism is a political philosophy which considers the state undesirable, unnecessary, and harmful, and instead promotes a stateless society, or anarchy. Any information relating to anarchists should be reported to your local police."


www.guardian.co.uk...

What is it with our society that we label anyone with opposing beliefs a terrorist? As much as the black bloc tactics of Anarchists caused some vandalism in London, it hardly puts them on the same level as terrorist imo.


In that case the banksters should be the first to go on the list, they are accountable to no-pne and have caused much more damage than a few broken windows.

And in any case, what does this 'should' mean? I am under no obligation to report anyone and neither will I. JUST SAY NO.
edit on 1-8-2011 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Anarchy always leads to violence.

BTW Anonymous = anarchy.

And Anonymous isn't doing anything new by using the internet. Robespierre of the French Revolution had Babeuf running his own daily publication, the equivalent of the internet back in those days. Robespierre eventually had to chop off his head for being too radical, which is saying a lot because Robespierre was as radical as they came (lost his head eventually too).
It was the publication that kept the blood flowing in the streets. The common peasant didn't know who Jaques the farmer was and why he needed a trip to the guillotine without the publication telling them. Media had power even in those days.

The actual ones doing the anarchy historically never come out on top, usually guillotined, hung, poisoned, jailed for life etc.
Anarchists are the forever failing fall guys, born to take the rap.



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by TinfoilTP
Anarchy always leads to violence.

BTW Anonymous = anarchy.

And Anonymous isn't doing anything new by using the internet. Robespierre of the French Revolution had Babeuf running his own daily publication, the equivalent of the internet back in those days. Robespierre eventually had to chop off his head for being too radical, which is saying a lot because Robespierre was as radical as they came (lost his head eventually too).
It was the publication that kept the blood flowing in the streets. The common peasant didn't know who Jaques the farmer was and why he needed a trip to the guillotine without the publication telling them. Media had power even in those days.

The actual ones doing the anarchy historically never come out on top, usually guillotined, hung, poisoned, jailed for life etc.
Anarchists are the forever failing fall guys, born to take the rap.


The Federal Reserve is one of the most powerful anarchic bodies on the planet. It answers to no-one and does exactly what it wants.....

Wake up people, this is more State Propaganda to divide and undermine opposition to the vile forces in charge.

edit on 1-8-2011 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by wcitizen

It answers to no-one and does exactly what it wants.....



edit on 1-8-2011 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)


That's not anarchy, what you describe is the exact definition of a monarchy. A King does as he wants and answers to nobody but hey has rules and order. Nothing anarchic about what you posted.

Chaos for the sake of chaos to effect change with no plan to replace the system, that is mostly what it is.

Which is why it is a favorite tool of TPTB, they never know what they want in the end and the backlash from the other side makes them easy to remove from the system once TPTB get things in place the way they want them.
This why those Anonymous clowns will all be going up the river.



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 12:55 PM
link   


What is it with our society that we label anyone with opposing beliefs a terrorist? As much as the black bloc tactics of Anarchists caused some vandalism in London, it hardly puts them on the same level as terrorist imo.


The horrors, unspeakable unbelievable unreal horrors that have been committed by governments and their willing populace's threw out modern industrialized history will never ever ever reach a comparable level with some x-emo kid throwing a rock or holding a sign.
edit on 2-8-2011 by poopmaster because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by FOXMULDER147
 


Eh, I think it's moot. I mean, they were better off under colonialism? Or how about a puppet regime?

Famine is not preferable, but I wouldn't say that this is really their fault. It's not like they exist in a void. I don't think anarchy could be "perfect" when surrounded by oligarchy. I mean, we heard from "pirates" who said that they were sick of their fish being taken by multinationals and their waters being polluted by companies dumping waste there, interestingly enough, the organizations taking advantage of the anarchistic situation devoid of regulations on such matters.

The irony is that regulations, in their formal state, would be obsolete due to a situation of anarchy - not "anarchy" in the modern semantic manipulation of the word.

The problem is that "anarchists" are considered a threat, not anarchists. If you don't see what I mean by using quotes, I'll clarify:

"Anarchy" is a state of absolute chaos and wanton destruction as "anarchists" wear black clothes, rough people up, break store windows.

Anarchy is a stateless society inhabited by anarchists who do what needs to be done and come to terms with violence, disaster and dispute in local and context-driven means of (per instance) resolution.



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by wcitizen
 


You can't have anarchy with control.

an- no (none)
archy - rule over

As opposed to monarchy (mono=one) and oligarchy (olig= the few).

I think Paulo Freire would say that the Federal Reserve is as much a prisoner of its intent as those millions (and billions along with the IMF) who are forced to live the way they do because of the system (i.e., with no choice in the matter). He would say they are the oppressors while we are the oppressed, but you can't have oppressed without oppressors (and vice versa) and the process of oppression dehumanizes both parties.

The concept of anarchy is the dissolution of control (that is to say, yeah, you still have control over where you are and your person) but you don't have control over others. This does not eliminate suffering - I don't think there exists any philosophy of governance that eliminates it, even though many promise to. Suffering (and comfort) just become more egalitarian, distributed based on context, circumstance and temporal existence (flood this year, calm for the next ten; famine this year, surplus the following, etc.) - you know, the way every single other living organism experiences the planet (well, except maybe those domesticated ones under our control).



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
So now it seems Anarchists are up there with Islamic extremists as potential terror threats to the UK


This was the surprising injunction from the Metropolitan Police issued to businesses and members of the public in Westminster last week. There was no warning about other political groups, but next to an image of the anarchist emblem, the City of Westminster police's "counter terrorist focus desk" called for anti-anarchist whistleblowers stating: "Anarchism is a political philosophy which considers the state undesirable, unnecessary, and harmful, and instead promotes a stateless society, or anarchy. Any information relating to anarchists should be reported to your local police."


www.guardian.co.uk...

What is it with our society that we label anyone with opposing beliefs a terrorist? As much as the black bloc tactics of Anarchists caused some vandalism in London, it hardly puts them on the same level as terrorist imo.


Anarchists are fundamentally non-violent and free (libertarian).

The people claiming to be anarchists are not what they say they are.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join