“It would be better that the Government recognised that there are risks, rather than frightening people in order to be able to pass laws which restrict civil liberties, precisely one of the objects of terrorism: that we live in fear and under a police state,” she said.
I've been saying this for years, but those who refuse to see it call me a conspiracy theorist. Maybe now people will listen when it comes from Stella Rimington, a woman who is in-the-know.
- sage & onion wrote:
What did she get fired?
No, she retired in 1996.
And no, she isn't a disgruntled whistleblower; she's had plenty of time to say what she has to say. sage & onion
- Del wrote:
- sage & onion wrote:
What did she get fired?
No, she retired in 1996.
And no, she isn't a disgruntled whistleblower; she's had plenty of time to say what she has to say. - sage & onion wrote:
Sounds pretty disgruntled to me, but hey what do I know. Del Maybe she's just being honest. She got her retirement money, she's written books; I don't know what she has to be peed off about. Del Unless of course, people tell lies when disgruntled. rudeboy wow lam surprised that someone from the mi5 has admitted what the government gets up to. rudeboy
- Del wrote:
Unless of course, people tell lies when disgruntled.
it really doesn't matter to those PPL whose eyes are closed and they dont want to open their eyes. Wednesday Jones It's the same argument with the introduction of ID cards in the UK. Infringement of human rights, erosion of civil liberties etc.... No such thing over here, simply, no ID card, no cooperation by banks, govt agencies etc. end of. If there was a central DNS databank in the UK, imagine the amount of unsolved crimes that would suddently be solved. The police would fall over! uaebadoo
1 Dubai Jobs .com The First Place to Find a Job in Dubai
uaebadoo sage & onion
- Del wrote:
Unless of course, people tell lies when disgruntled.
Considering the fact that she worked for MI5, she should not be spouting off surely? Wednesday Jones I suppose the UK Government can hardly smack her fingers for divulging contrary to the Official Secrets Act when numpty civil servants carelessly leave laptops with top secret information on trains, in skips, you name it! sage & onion
- Wednesday Jones wrote:
I suppose the UK Government can hardly smack her fingers for divulging contrary to the Official Secrets Act when numpty civil servants carelessly leave laptops with top secret information on trains, in skips, you name it!
Why not, that is another problem, head of MI5, she should keep quiet. Del
- sage & onion wrote:
- Del wrote:
Unless of course, people tell lies when disgruntled.
Considering the fact that she worked for MI5, she should not be spouting off surely? - Del wrote:
The thing is, what she is saying isn't exactly a state secret. Many people can 'see' what's happening. godsent I think people are missing the obvious here. It is the role of the security mechanism in any country to want to have a good grasp of the happenings and mitigate all threats. These days it’s a total different security terrain hence I don’t mind civil liberties being taken away from me. I don’t mind that the government knows I am taking a crap, copulating, spending on this and that, know which people I am calling because I am a law abiding citizen! By that same rule I would like the government and the security mechanism to know when a bunch of CHAVs from a certain descent are planning to hijack the public transport and bomb innocent victims. Just my 0.02 cents Del
- godsent wrote:
I don’t mind civil liberties being taken away from me .
Well I DO mind mine being taken away from me, thank you very much. These draconian new laws are for EVERYONE. ME AND YOU. NOT just for men with beards as you so obviously believe.
- godsent wrote:
I don’t mind that the government knows I am taking a crap, copulating, spending on this and that, know which people I am calling because I am a law abiding citizen!
So am I.
I suppose you enjoy when the store detective follows you around the shop?
Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated , that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead with world leaders to deliver them from this evil.
The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government. - Henry Kissinger, speaking at a Bilderburgers meeting in Evian, France, May 21, 1992. Unbeknownst to him, his speech was being taped by a Swiss delegate.
You're thinking just the way guys like Kissinger want you to. rudeboy sorry guys but after 9/11 our rights were taken away from us. all our telephone and mobile lines are tapped. they watch us from the sky and listen to whatever we say on the internet. Our rights have been taken away just because of "national security". Del Kissinger calling for a New World Order
- godsent wrote:
I don’t mind civil liberties being taken away from me .
NOT just for men with beards as you so obviously believe.
[color=darkblue]Trust me these common stereotypes are no longer applicable and it's more into assessing somone's social communications and daily patterns. I look quite the charmer with my 5 o' clock shadow thank you. Like I said the security terrain has changed drastically. [/color]
individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government .[/i] -
[color=darkblue]There's always an opportunity cost and if certain civil liberties are taken away as a precautionary and safety net which would protect me and my loved ones from an imminent security threat than so be it.[/color] Del whether real or promulgated godsent
- Del wrote:
whether real or promulgated
The funny thing about the 21st century is that awareness and skepticism are on an all time high aided by technology as a tool for being immediately and well informed.
What's that quote again "You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."
There is a corrective mechanism which u leave out. Bush's regime was known to come up with silly laws that took away civil liberties for the sake of taking away those liberties without adding value to the security shield. You now suddenly have a president with possibly a more liberal and better believe system in the most powerful nation in the world.
Anyways mate, we are looking at this issue from two different schools of thought. I prize security as something of a necessity over certain liberties I have as a civic minded citizen. Del
- godsent wrote:
I prize security as something of a necessity over certain liberties I have as a civic minded citizen.
For forty years we were frightened and taken in by a fake Communist threat to 'our way of life'. Today it's Islam. rudeboy
- Del wrote:
- godsent wrote:
I prize security as something of a necessity over certain liberties I have as a civic minded citizen.
For forty years we were frightened and taken in by a fake Communist threat to 'our way of life'. Today it's Islam. - godsent wrote:
they are BLOODY scared of islam like SHIT. on my flight to UK a few weeks ago every "native" english was looking at me, staring at me like i was some al qaeda member. lol they were shitting themselves everytime i would get up :D muyesser Between the 1940 to 1960’s Communism stretched around the block so rapidly that stood a real threat for the US-UK. it even led to liberation movements in the colonies.. The pressure of being in competition with Socialist nations gained better wages, benefits, and public services for many nations around the globe.. Can we actually say that Islam would be a similar threat to the world order.. :( xl rudeboy i dont like it when i have to take my shoes off and my belt off when walking through a xray machine at a airport. everyone does it and i m not sure if anyone likes it. i guess 5 years down the road they will be asking to take our clothes off ;) guess we wont have any rights and liberties then :D Del
- rudeboy wrote:
on my flight to UK a few weeks ago every "native" english was looking at me, staring at me like i was some al qaeda member. lol they were shitting themselves everytime i would get up :D
Ten years ago you wouldn't think twice if you saw a man with a beard on a plane. Today, everyone's paranoid, thanks to a carefully managed psyops media campaign created by Tavistock. gamercowboy It's very unfortunate that people are so willing to give up their civil liberties. I really don't know how to explain it to people though. Their fear makes them irrational and they accept or even encourage the erosion of our rights. Let's take something real simple here: bringing liquids aboard a plane. This is now forbidden in many airports around the world. All because of the alleged bomb plot in 2006. Do you really feel safer for this? What about the banning of headscarves in some schools in France? In my opinion, it doesn't matter if the threat is real or fake. The civil liberties and rights that we often take for granted were usually only gained through bloodshed. I'll not have them taken from me so easily. The only time that I think it should be acceptable is for temporary suspension in times of imminent threat. Del
- gamercowboy wrote:
It's very unfortunate that people are so willing to give up their civil liberties. I really don't know how to explain it to people though. Their fear makes them irrational and they accept or even encourage the erosion of our rights.
Let's take something real simple here: bringing liquids aboard a plane. This is now forbidden in many airports around the world. All because of the alleged bomb plot in 2006. Do you really feel safer for this? What about the banning of headscarves in some schools in France?
In my opinion, it doesn't matter if the threat is real or fake. The civil liberties and rights that we often take for granted were usually only gained through bloodshed. I'll not have them taken from me so easily. The only time that I think it should be acceptable is for temporary suspension in times of imminent threat.
RobbyG
- Del wrote:
Dame Stella Rimington, the former head of MI5, has warned that the fear of terrorism is being exploited by the Government to erode civil liberties and risks creating a police state.
“It would be better that the Government recognised that there are risks, rather than frightening people in order to be able to pass laws which restrict civil liberties, precisely one of the objects of terrorism: that we live in fear and under a police state,” she said.
I've been saying this for years, but those who refuse to see it call me a conspiracy theorist. Maybe now people will listen when it comes from Stella Rimington, a woman who is in-the-know.
Nothing new.
Fright is used to keep the groups lined up with all heads the same way. Politicians can expand goverment and expenditures easily this way, and even set monetary impulses to ´revive´ an economy (think Bush 2003)...
Fear is a great way to get things done. For centuries politicians make use of it as a weapon. bezor
- Del wrote:
- sage & onion wrote:
- Del wrote:
Unless of course, people tell lies when disgruntled.
Considering the fact that she worked for MI5, she should not be spouting off surely? - Del wrote:
The thing is, what she is saying isn't exactly a state secret. Many people can 'see' what's happening. - sage & onion wrote:
As always, people agreeing with this kind of laws are the ones not affected by it. Then comes a NEW law (like the patriot act) and then they wake up. Too late. Del
- bezor wrote:
- Del wrote:
- sage & onion wrote:
- Del wrote:
Unless of course, people tell lies when disgruntled.
Considering the fact that she worked for MI5, she should not be spouting off surely? - Del wrote:
The thing is, what she is saying isn't exactly a state secret. Many people can 'see' what's happening. - sage & onion wrote:
As always, people agreeing with this kind of laws are the ones not affected by it. Then comes a NEW law (like the patriot act) and then they wake up. Too late. - Del wrote:
First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me. - Pastor Martin Niemöller