Tory plans to make us all Terrorists!

Tory plans to make us all Terrorists!

By Dark Politricks

This is a recent video from Russell Brand about the new UK Tory governments plans for a new anti terror bill that will crack down on free speech and other civil liberties.

It seems that with every new government we get a new “anti terrorism” law passed, Tony Blair passed at least 2 that I can remember. They were mostly used for memorable things such as:

• Freezing all Icelandic money in UK banks after the Iceland Banking crisis – something which the Icelandic people have never forgiven us for. From my recent trip to Iceland I would not be surprised to see a statue of Gordon Brown put up in Reykjavik just so that people could throw tomatoes at it.
• Throwing out and then arresting OAP protestors from Labour conferences who dared shout out “liar” as the warmongers on stage defended their illegal war on Iraq.
• Allowing M16 / MI5 Agents to pass questions to CIA torturers at “black site” prisons and Gitmo, who then proceeded to abuse, humiliate and injure the prisoners many of which were innocent. The ones that are not, including leaders of the now destabilised mess of a country we “liberated” called Libya, are even now trying to sue the government for their complicity in torture e.g Abdul Hakim Belhaj. This included one incident in which one British jihadi’s fingernails were ripped out after MI6 suggested that a notorious Pakistani intelligence agency detain him, and MI5 and Greater Manchester police drew up questions to be put to him.
• Cracking down on tourists and other photographers within London taking photos of buildings as they could be “planning terrorist” attacks.

We should always be careful when “new” terrorism laws are proposed. Especially as with the current one it is to be “fast tracked” through government.

This means no proper debate over the merits of the bill and no proper time to propose amendments and changes to the bill.

Hopefully enough libertarian/liberal-minded Labour, Lib Dem, SNP and hopefully Tory back benchers will stand up against this act of tyranny.

As I said in my last piece, the UK Tory Government, freed of the shackles of coalition with liberals, are planning on repealing the Human Rights Act. A piece of legislation brought in by Tony Blair in the 90’s but created from the European Convention on Human Rights which was drawn up by the Tory post war government to show to the world how civilised we should all be in future.

It is sad that a future Tory government is now going to remove this legislation due to a minority of cases where they have not been able to deport criminal immigrants due to their “right to a family life”.

It seems that the Tories wish that if you are born in this country and your parents are not, that if they commit a crime they can now be ripped away from you leaving you with the choice to follow them to whatever horrible war-torn country they escaped from (Libya, Somalia, Iraq, Syria, Sudan…).

The question is what level of criminality requires this response. I can understand the Government wishing to get rid of terrorists, murderers and rapists but what about non-payment of Council Tax, a crime punishable by prison, which many British born OAPs have found themselves facing? What crimes would exact this level of response, does a list even exist?

It seems we English are sticklers for the rule of law even when we don’t agree with small parts of it.

Instead of just ignoring section 8 of the Human Rights Act like France does whenever it wants to do something the EU prohibits we decide to throw the whole law away.

Instead of just declaring that the house of Commons is the supreme will of the people, and that if it votes to decide to remove someone from these shores because of a REAL terrorist crime then so be it, family or not. The problem comes with all the guff these bills include that label you and me “domestic terrorists” for speaking out against the Government, war, its foreign policy, support of Israel, or other civil rights that are being chipped away bit by bit never to return.

I have no problem if a REAL terrorist who is not a British citizen is deported at the end of his or her sentence. The problem is that the Government is proposing to throw the whole Human Rights Act away to achieve this instead of coming up with another solution.

If the House of Commons IS supposed to be the supreme will of the people because we have voted for it – try to forget the UKIP member who got 0 votes despite voting for himself for a moment, we don’t have voter fraud in Western Democracies, it’s just nasty evil countries like Russia that do things like that. Then a vote in the house should be enough to override any appeal on Human Rights grounds due to section 8. This is as long as the case has been proved beyond doubt, the convict has had his chance at appeal, and the criminal does in fact pose a threat to the country.

I am perfectly happy to see a UK Bill of Rights on TOP of, not INSTEAD of, the Human Rights Act, to achieve such aims if needed. I just don’t want to see families ripped apart over nonsensical crimes or crimes that shouldn’t even exist e.g drugs, protest, freedom of speech that goes against popular view etc.

David Cameron has gone on record to say that the belief that if you as a citizen “just followed the law you would be left alone”, is now going to be turned on its head.

That in itself is worrying Hilter-esque language that could be taken to mean anything.

Wasn’t an Englishman’s home his castle?

Were we not the creators of law as it exists in many countries through the Magna Carta, Due Process, the idea that we are all innocent until proven guilty.

What about the social contract between citizen and state that meant we plebs had our rights and the government protected them and the country as long as we paid our taxes?

As Russell Brand says in the piece below, a similar piece of legislation which the Tories are basing their own law on, was recently brought into Canada and the people were appalled by it.

It meant that:

• Innocent words can be interpreted as terrorism – make of that what you will.
• Speaking “recklessly” which could lead to a terrorist act being committed is a crime. So speaking out about the increasing authoritarian nature of our world on this blog could lead to a mentally disturbed reader to go and fly a plane into a skyscraper and I would spend 5 years in jail – fair?
• Protesting could lead to government surveillance. So any kind of protest by Unions, Students, Occupy, or anybody against the increasing Police State be warned.
• Meddling with ANY CORPORTATE INTERESTS could be interpreted as terrorism under the new UK act. So protests that prevent Vodafone from opening their doors (UKUncut beware!) or the use of Bitcoin or other electronic currencies that stopped the banks from monitoring your money could now be considered a crime.

Watch the video to see more and spread it.

Our rights are being eroded and we could all soon be considered terrorists for speaking our minds, protesting corruption and the corporate take over of our life.

Is that really terrorism or just the rights we should expect to enjoy as a member of a supposedly free country?

View the original article at Dark Politricks.

© 2015 By Dark Politricks

Send Dark Politricks.com examples of police brutality or ways to prevent the machine rolling over us this way!

Send Dark Politricks.com examples of police brutality or ways to prevent the machine rolling over us this way!

By Dark Politricks

This site is a “power to the people”, free speech, anti war on terror, anti Big Brother site that hates stupid laws and regulations and resents our subservience to supra national entities like the EU, the World Bank, the G20 and the move towards globalisation that means jobs are taken away from middle class people like ourselves and given over  to slave workers in China and India who will work for a pittance.

Our country is full of stupid laws that need repealing. There was a gleam of hope when the Liberal Democrats got into power with their much vaunted Freedom Bill but after Tory interference it was watered down to a charter against rouge car clampers.

There was no removal of the unfair extradition treaty to the US or the return to the right of silence without it being brought up in court. No repeal of anti privacy laws that allow countless agencies to enter your house without a warrant and nothing that let us protest when and how we want. Permit to Protest – you must be joking!

Our stupid drug laws fill prisons with people needing treatment not punishment before re-sending them back out to the community to rob and steal to fund their habit again.

Our NHS is a known beacon for anyone around the world wanting free and often expensive health care which we tax payers have to pay for.

And to top it off all the banksters who broke our country in half are carrying on using our pensions as casion chips for their gambling whilst we suffer with closed libraries, schools and other cuts in public services. Why are the people who had nothing to do with the economic collapse being asked to pay for it? Why are future generations being made to pay for the mistakes of the rich current generation?

Our cops are bent as a nine bob note and get away with crimes every day If it wasn’t for the rise of people carrying video cameras around with them and mobile phones many police abuses would not get noticed or recorded for us to see.

Therefore if anyone has any films of policeman acting against their mandate e.g beating people up unnecessarily or breaching their role to “protect and serve” then please send them this way so I can display them

If anyone has ideas on how we can help roll back the surveillance state being built around us then please let me know so I can share those ideas with my readers.

If people have knowledge on using computer systems without being tracked by the authorities then please let me know. Details such as using open Wi-Fi networks and proxies, removing your battery from your phone to stop being GPS/GPRS tracked, preventing iPhone and Google from storing and uploading your data to any policeman with the right tools and using block lists to bypass ISP’s that sniff P2P torrent packets to see what you are downloading. Plus using special software to super encrypt your messages without Microsofts’s back door accessing them all or just using disposable email addresses and proxy server chains to post your messages on Twitter or Facebook anonymously without being tracked. This is all valuable information.

If you have it then please let me know! I have already listed some ways to beat some tracking and logging by the authorities but much more can be done.

 

Also if people know of corrupt, inefficient or wasteful local government departments or councils, or members of such institutions, then please let me know who these people are and what they have done. These are people who live off our tax money.

They are there to serve us NOT themselves. I have personally written letters to MP’s and Government officials and got respones – many have been blatant lies or attempts to placate me so I will vote for them at the next election. Our government is full of crooks and career politicians.

Remember if we don’t stick together and pool our knowledge the machine will continue to roll over us until we are nothing but dust!

So send me any dirt you can find!

 

View the original article “Please send me examples of police brutality or ways to prevent the machine rolling over our liberty!” on darkpolitricks.com.

Is the UK journalist who broke the Super Injunction asking for a test case in court?

By Dark Politicks

It seems I wasn’t far from wrong in my last article: UK Super Injunctions prove #altnews is the premier source of real news when I said:

It would not surprise me in the slightest if the person or persons behind the Twitter accounts that are leaking the super injunction info are not far removed from the papers themselves.

It seems that I was spot on. Not only are the lawyers for one of the footballers covered by an injunction trying to sue Twitter to get details of the person behind an account breaching the injunctions but the Daily Mail reported yesterday that:

A journalist on one of Britain’s most respected newspapers – who also appears on a widely-viewed BBC programme – could face a jail sentence after naming on Twitter a Premier League footballer who had taken out a privacy injunction.

In the first case of its kind, lawyers for the soccer star have persuaded a High Court judge to ask Attorney General Dominic Grieve QC to consider a criminal prosecution against the writer for breaching a privacy injunction. If Mr Grieve decides to issue contempt of court proceedings, the individual faces a prison sentence of up to two years.

The unprecedented legal action is the latest attempt by a public figure to try to curb the growing use of the Internet – especially Twitter – to expose the adulterous affairs and misbehaviour of celebrities and footballers.

As the UK Courts are criticised for creating a privacy law through the back door and our Parliament is accused of lagging behind the huge changes in social media these are interesting times in the UK as two “Human Rights” battle each other out for supremacy.

Article 8 provides a right to respect for one’s “private and family life, his home and his correspondence”, subject to certain restrictions that are “in accordance with law” and“necessary in a democratic society”.

and

Article 10 provides the right to freedom of expression, subject to certain restrictions that are “in accordance with law” and “necessary in a democratic society“. This right includes the freedom to hold opinions, and to receive and impart information and ideas.

So we have the right of freedom of speech battling it out with the right of those who can afford expensive lawyers to take out injunctions to protect their private life.

Scanning the list of named individuals on one of the Twitter accounts at the centre of the storm this usually this comes down to the fact that a famous man has been caught having an affair or some form of sexual shenanigans and is trying to prevent his wife or family from finding out the details.

As Mark Easton says on his recent blog posting:

What is private? And, when push comes to shove, who should decide?

The arguments of the last week have exposed an ancient tension between Parliament and the judiciary.

Politicians, including the prime minister, have expressed concern that “unelected judges” are using the Human Rights Act to create a privacy law on the hoof.

Basically, they are saying: “Get your undemocratic tanks off our lawn”.

On Friday two of the most senior judges in England and Wales lobbed the criticism back saying that, by passing the Human Rights Act, Parliament has already effectively created a privacy law, and it was down to the poor old judges to try to make sense of the confusion and mess.

The Super Injunction system is plainly ridiculous at the injunctions seem to only cover media covered by English law and this was proved right when yesterday the Sunday Herald published details of one the footballers covered by such an injunction. They claimed that

“The issue is one of freedom of information and of a growing argument in favour of more restrictive privacy laws.”

He added that he had taken extensive legal advice and was not expecting any legal consequences because the injunction was not valid in Scotland – only in England.

His paper, he said, was not published, distributed or sold in England.

Therefore it will be interesting to see how far the lawyers trying to get hold of Twitter account details regarding breaches of other injunctions will get.

Twitter is a US based company and presumably covered by US law and the First Amendment which prohibits the making of any law infringing on the freedom of speech or the freedom of the press.

As bloggers, micro bloggers, Tweets and personal websites could be classified as “citizen journalism” then surely the account the Tweets came from would be protected by this law if based in the USA.

However if the account was based in England or Wales or the computer used to post the tweet came from an IP address located in the countries covered by the super injunction e.g England, Wales and Northern Ireland then there could be case made for a breach.

I cannot believe a tech savvy journalist would have been so stupid to open an account up in his own name, using his real email address and then post messages knowingly from an English IP address unless he wanted to be caught.

There are so many mechanisms nowadays to avoid having to do this such as using Proxy Servers based overseas and Disposable Email Accounts that are untraceable that anyone caught breaching Super Injunctions by micro blogging could only be asking for a chance to bring a test case to a UK court.

Maybe that is exactly what this supposedly famous UK journalist wanted to do in the first place.