Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: "Thought crimes"

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/apr2004/blun-a24.shtml
Britain: Blunkett to legislate for "thought crimes" and guilt by association
By Richard Tyler
24 April 2004
Twenty years after 1984, the date for George Orwell's dystopian vision, the
British home secretary hopes to introduce a new category of imprisonable
offence-"thought crime," or guilt by association.
According to two recent newspaper articles, David Blunkett is considering
jailing those who merely "sympathise" with so-called extremist Islamic
groups or who continue to "associate" with alleged terrorist suspects.
The Observer wrote on April 11, "Sympathisers with extremist Islamic groups
will risk jail under controversial plans to make merely associating with a
suspected terrorist a crime."
The next day, the Times reported, "Those whose names were found on seized
mobile phones, computers or e-mails and who tried further contact would find
themselves facing prison."
The paper added that the home secretary would like a formal warning given to
"every known contact of a terror suspect or extremist Islamic group." A
source close to the home secretary was quoted saying, "We are targeting
support networks, the things that enable terrorism to be perpetrated by
other people. It is intended to deter people from hanging around the fringes
of undesirables."
The latest musings of Blunkett are a double attack on democratic rights.
Firstly, the proposal to introduce "guilt by association" makes criminals of
those who have committed no crime. Secondly, by extension the so-called
"undesirables" with whom they associate face a form of banning order
reminiscent of the apartheid regime in South Africa, preventing them from
coming into contact with anyone.
Barry Hugill, spokesman for civil rights group Liberty, said, "You cannot
start imprisoning people for what may or may not be going on inside their
head."
The Labour government has introduced some of the most draconian
"anti-terrorist" legislation in Europe. Britain has declared a "technical" s
tate of emergency, enabling the suspension of sections of the European
Convention on Human Rights. This then makes possible the indefinite
internment of foreign nationals as "terrorist suspects," without recourse to
the normal juridical process.
The 14 individuals who have been locked up under the terms of the
Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 (ATCSA) enter a Kafkaesque world
where they may not see the evidence that supposedly justifies their
incarceration, nor may they appoint an independent legal representative to
challenge their imprisonment in the courts. They can only be set free if
they agree to be deported back to the country from which they have fled,
where their life may well be in danger. The choice is stark: indefinite
detention without due legal process, or possible death.
In February, Blunkett proposed the introduction of a form of "pre-emptive"
justice, where suspects could be jailed based on charges for crimes they had
not yet committed.
It is a measure of the disregard for longstanding democratic norms that
permeates official politics and most of the media in Britain that the home
secretary's latest proposal passed largely without comment or criticism.

 offence-"thought crime," or guilt by association.
direi che e' prevedibile - il totalitarismo e' l'essenza dei movimenti
"di sinistra" dal socialismo in poi, nella sua veste "laburista" sono 
totalitari per il bene del poppolo (o ggente) che aspetta di essere guidata.
Manifestazioni di dissenso sono poco gradite, questa e'
"la terza via b.liariana" che lo sa ben lui cosa e' giusto per la ggente
(non a caso va d'accordo con Aznar e Bush solo apprentemente non affini
a lui ideologicamente)
Bye
------
"There was an attempt a few years ago by a group still working there to complain
about policy towards Iraq and Israel but they were told they could forget their
careers if they went public. 
------ 
preso dal lungo:
Why they sent the letter 
By Paul Reynolds 
BBC News Online world affairs correspondent 
Normally, missives from ex-diplomats about how policy has gone wrong are given
as much attention as ranting from ex-foreign correspondents about how news has
gone wrong - virtually none. 
But a letter from 52 former senior British diplomats will have a longer shelf
life given the unprecedented numbers of signatories, the language used and the
publicity stirred. 
It criticised UK Prime Minister Tony Blair's close ties to the "doomed" US
foreign policy for the Middle East and urged him to start influencing the White
House to change its views or to stop backing them. 
The ex-diplomats tapped into a current of public concern about the problems in
Iraq. 
"The charge that they are just old buffers and Arabists from the 'camel corps'
won't stick," said Rosemary Hollis, head of the Middle East programme at the
Royal Institute for International Affairs in London. 
The list does include many Arabists and the letter was organised by one of them,
Oliver Miles, a former ambassador to Libya, Luxembourg and Greece. He is now a
consultant for businesses seeking to set up in Libya and elsewhere in the Middle
East, including Iraq. 
Israel first 
It was interesting that the letter concentrated first on Israel and only then on
Iraq. 
Foreign office Arabists have a particular hostility towards Israel, going right
back to the 1930s and 1940s when Israelis overturned British policy in
Palestine, then under a British mandate. 
It is the worst mess diplomatically in my lifetime with the possible exception
of Suez 
Sir Crispin Tickell, 
Former UN ambassador 
Indeed, the trigger for the letter, as it says itself, was the news conference
by US President George W Bush and Mr Blair in Washington during which they
agreed that the Israeli "disengagement" plan would not stop future negotiations. 
But there were also signatures of diplomats who had served in Europe (a former
ambassador to Germany among them) and elsewhere. 
One of the non-Arabists is Sir Crispin Tickell, former British ambassador at the
UN. He was there when the first Gulf War was fought against Iraq in 1991. 
"Oliver Miles sent out an e-mail last week," he told BBC News Online. "I told
him I would help though I did not see the actual text since I was going to
China. 
"It is absurd to say this is just an Arabist letter. I am not one myself. My
concern was the status of the United Nations. 
"The invasion of Iraq was illegal. It is the worst mess diplomatically in my
lifetime with the possible exception of Suez. 
"As for the Arab/Israel issue, we had hoped that the roadmap [peace plan] might
make progress if the Americans had displayed leadership and drawn the line with
Israel. We have instead seen retrogression." 
Measured government response 
Conscious of the weighty opinion expressed by so many diplomatic knights and
near knights, the British government has adopted a careful response, enunciated
first in an interview on the BBC by Foreign Office Minister Mike O'Brien. 
He took the line that he did not know what the fuss was all about since the
government, too, shared the aims of a two-state solution between Israel and
Palestine, and a free Iraq. 
"They seem to be advocating a policy and that we should follow it on the Middle
East, but we are following it. Then they criticise us for doing it," he said. 
Serving diplomats 
According to Dr Hollis it is highly likely that the opinions of the retired
diplomats are mirrored by serving diplomats. 
"Critics of foreign policy inside the Foreign Office have gone very quiet," she
said. 
This letter probably speaks for a body of opinion inside the Foreign Office as
well 
Rosemary Hollis, RIIA 
"There was an attempt a few years ago by a group still working there to complain
about policy towards Iraq and Israel but they were told they could forget their
careers if they went public. 
"The Arabists have seen what has happened in the state department. They have
been totally marginalised by the neoconservatives who regard them as
bleeding-heart liberals who have gone soft on the natives. 
"So this letter probably speaks for a body of opinion inside the Foreign Office
as well." 
Something similar happened before the Iraq war when a former British Chief of
Defence Staff, Field Marshal Lord Bramall wrote to the Times warning that an
invasion would pour "petrol rather than water" on the flames. This was felt to
be a warning from serving officers as well. 
Attempt to influence 
The letter therefore goes beyond an expression of frustration by people no
longer in the driving seat. 
It is trying to have an impact on policy in a new way because the old way has
proved ineffective. 
The fact is that British foreign policy under Tony Blair is very much made in
the prime minister's office, just as it was under Margaret Thatcher. 
Mrs Thatcher's contempt for the Foreign Office was legendary. She would have
thrown this letter into the Downing Street bin. Mr Blair does not have such
contempt but he knows his own mind and also has a foreign secretary in Jack
Straw who thinks like him. 
That leaves officials who think otherwise very isolated. 
This partly explains why their colleagues who can now speak out have done so. 
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/uk_news/3663029.stm
Published: 2004/04/27 13:55:04 GMT
·? BBC MMIV

 Manifestazioni di dissenso sono poco gradite,
Chez nous, non sono gradite soltanto se non sono fruibili come merce *e*
strumento di stabilità sociale (vedasi il sedicente
ribellismo/individualismo, genialmente assorbito dall'industria
pubblicitaria e dello spettacolo, che solo in esso ha trovato la leva di
Archimede "definitiva"). Bye.
Namib

 ma si tratta solo di un'illusione "ottica".
Bah. Bisogna provare a viverci (e a morirci) nelle societą totalitarie per
dire che l'alternativa č una illusione ottica.
Tb

 offence-"thought crime," or guilt by association.
Nota che in UK il solo considera l'introduzione di reati associativi
viene considerato orwelliano mentgre qui da noi non solo tali reati sono
previsti dal codice ma chi li critica viene tacciato di connivenza con
la mafia.
Ciao
Ale
-- 
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - 
http://www.Mailgate.ORG

 dire che l'alternativa è una illusione ottica.
quoto


Tonibaruch ha scritto:



scherzi?! Ma allora sei proprio un reazionario! Oramai lo sanno tutti che
l'URSS staliniana non era mica vera, era solo un'illusione
ottica...*ROTFL*!
:)))
JFK
-- 
questo articolo e` stato inviato via web dal servizio gratuito 
http://www.newsland.it/news
 segnala gli abusi ad 
ab...@newsland.it

 dire che l'alternativa è una illusione ottica.
Mon ami, io sono "allenato categorialmente" a questo totalitarismo, e quindi
lo ritengo (soggettivamente, cioè culturalmente) decisamente più
"comprensibile" di quello (ad es.) "islamico" (credi che avrei preferito
vivere nella Kabul talebana piuttosto che nella Peoria yankee?). Ciò non
toglie che milioni (anzi, miliardi) di persone continuino a vivere in
società che "noi" (come entità culturale) disprezziamo, senza peraltro
sentirsi persone culturalmente "mutile". La "loro" storia è a) sbagliata o
b) subìta (e perché, allora, "noi" non la subiamo - dicitur -?)? Tertium non
datur? La c.d. "libertà" ha un volto oscuro (antistorico e missionario), con
il quale sarebbe bene fare sempre i conti, invece di intonare acriticamente
voltairriani ed autogratificanti peana alla "nostra" presunta tolleranza.
Namib

 Namib

 Facciamo che qualcuno te la tolga quella libertà. Facciamo che tuo padre
[cut]
Facciamo che non hai capito il punto, e stop. Io la "libertà" (pur
virgolettandola) me la tengo cara (più di quanto non faccia tu, mi pare); né
mi sento particolarmente "oppresso" da alcunché. Ripassa quando sarai più
pacato e ragionevole. P.S. L'aggettivo
"adolescenziale" sei pregato di appiopparlo a sòreta.
Namib

 virgolettandola) me la tengo cara (più di quanto non faccia tu, mi pare)
Ah, mi pareva che fosse un'illusione ottica. Ma forse avrò capito male. E da
cosa deduci di tenertela più cara di me? Mi interessa.
Tb

 Namib
gente come voi se non ci fosse bisognerebbe inventarla: questo ng per la
politica internazionale non serve a un cazzo, ma per le risate e'
insostituibile. Grazie di esistere!


 cosa deduci di tenertela più cara di me? Mi interessa.
grazie anche a te!...  :)


 e da cosa deduci di tenertela più cara di me?
Dal fatto che trovi "irritante" discutere di cose che *ci* riguardano da
vicino, soltanto perché (elemento certo non irrilevante) il KGB non verrà a
bussare di notte alla tua porta, anche se le lasciamo così come sono.
Namib

 Secondo te, in guerra, si interrogano i nemici o li si bombarda?
Si...ma no na sangue freddo..  [IL GECKO su IPI]

 digeribili (non dico che sia il tuo caso, parlo in generale).
Naturalmente, se io (per assurdo) avessi attribuito al termine
"totalitarismo" il senso che (IMVHO) erroneamente e volgarmente gli è
attribuito, avresti
perfettamente ragione. Solo che non è così. Spero di essermi spiegato. Bye.
Namib

 Namib
Ok, adesso ho capito.
Tb
-- 
[Ma come si spiega che l'Irak di Saddam fosse armato di carri sovietici,
missili sovietici, contraerea sovietica,  consiglieri sovietici...???]
le cifre me le spiego dal basso prezzo che gli armamenti URSS avevano
rispetto agli altri di altri paesi [SERGIO su IPI] 

 Namib
ma te che ne pensi di 
www.fff.org
 ?
Bye

 ma te che ne pensi di 
www.fff.org
 ?
Ottimo. Sono i liberali con i quali amerei litigare. E che non sarebbe
necessario "rieducare"... Ho messo il sito tra i "preferiti"; e non lo cito
spesso solo perché mi sembrerebbe di "rubarti il mestiere". Ad es., cosa ne
pensi dell'art. sulla privatizzazione dell'etere? In mancanza (ed in
messianica attesa) di monopolio pubblico-sovietico-razionale, mi pare una
soluzione-ponte perfetta. Bye.
Namib

 necessario "rieducare"... 
Non sarebbe necessario perche' sarebbero morti <g>
Ale

 Namib
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3707499.stm
Colonel Paul Hughes, the first director of strategic planning in Iraq
after the
war, whose brother died in Vietnam said: "Here I am, 30 years later,
thinking we
will win every fight and lose the war, because we don't understand the
war we
are in." 
un must read:
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1084659009373&call_pageid=968332188854&col=968350060724
The privatization  of Abu Ghraib
[..]
The military also had qualms when DynCorp, the firm involved in the
prostitution
scandal in Bosnia, was brought in to train the Iraqi police force. 
It's already in Afghanistan, providing security for President Hamid
Karzai.
"Their guys are seen as too swaggery, waving their guns around, full
of Texas
testosterone," says Hartung.