Previous Entry Share Next Entry
(no subject)
2012
unknownj
This morning, I saw David Blunkett on a politics type program. As per usual, 95% of what came out of his mouth was rabid fascist nonsense, but for the most part it was at least dressed up to look like it wasn't...

I suppose the alarm bells really started ringing for me when he started saying that international crime and nuisance crime is inextricably linked, or words to that effect. While he was unclear on the subject, I was left with the impression that he meant that terrorists who fly planes into skyscrapers often start out their careers as graffiti artists on council estates, and work their way up.

Whether or not that's his point, it would be in-keeping with the current climate of fear, which I might add, a certain highstreet bank has subscribed to (at least in part). I refer to training videos on money laundering which seem to emphasise the fact that if a couple of cashiers had just been more vigilant, 9/11 would never have happened..

Regardless, this is not the point I am trying to make

I'm going to go through this slowly, emphasising key words where relevant.

He then went on to justify stripping people of their rights in order to protect society as a whole from a threat that he alone can perceive. He called upon the example of the Netherlands, which he described as an example of a country where free thinking is allowed, where freedom of expression is welcomed, and he said that these things were potentially dangerous.

I can't find the quote(s) that I so desperately need for this, but he challenged peoples' right to "think what they like, say what they like and do what they like".

Obviously of those three, the third has to come with the condition that it falls within the law, and the right to free speech should perhaps have its limitations (inciting racial hatred is bad, for example). But he actually said that we should consider the implications of letting people think what they want, and linked it to terrorism.

Do you see?

Because he evidently doesn't.

(poor taste left in because I have zero compassion for that evil cunt)

  • 1
I thought Blunkett was from Labour? Has Labour swung so far over that that is the new party line?

Labour has a disturbing recent history of Home Secretaries who are evil... before and after the job, they seem fine, but while in that position they're tossers.

It's quite simple - Labour is now the party of the right (even the traditional wearing of Labour red has been moving through the purple towards Conservative blue..... am I the only one to have noticed this?)

Meanwhile, the Conservatives have shuffled over into the 'loony' category in an attempt to differentiate their policies from Labour, the Liberals have been left quite bewildered to find themselves on the left of British politics without actually going anywhere, and the Green party continue to be several branches short of a tree.

  • 1
?

Log in

No account? Create an account