« Compare and Contrast. | Main | Harold Pinter and the Nobel for Literature. »
October 13, 2005
Seumas Milne.
Odd to find myself agreeing with Seumas Milne. Yes, I know, he points out that the people of Iraq and Afghanistan have a "right to resist foreign occupation" which comes rather close to stating that they’ve got a right to kill British troops, something I have to say I don’t agree with. Similarly he fails to mention his own recent troubles with Hizb ut Tahrir. But this is absolutely spot on:
As negotiating tactics
go, it's a pretty transparent one - but it still seems to work every
time in British politics. The government has a policy it knows will
arouse a blizzard of controversy. So it starts out with a maximalist,
even outlandish, version. When that is predictably greeted with
outrage, it retreats crab-like to its core position - and the final
outcome is then accepted with relief that the government has
compromised. But the net effect is to drive through measures that might
have been thrown out without the softening-up process.
So it has been with Tony Blair's anti-terror plans, first unveiled in August in the wake of the London bombings. In their original back-of-the-envelope formulation, they included the truly Ruritanian wheeze of codifying a list of violent historical events that Britons could be sent to prison for "glorifying, exalting or celebrating". Last week, after two months of ridicule, the home secretary, Charles Clarke, let it be known that the most absurd parts of this censorship scheme had been dropped. Then on Tuesday, he signalled that the government might be prepared to shift on its proposal to jail terror suspects without charge for up to three months.
The apparent climbdown has, as expected, been embraced by key opponents. But, as publication of the terrorism bill yesterday confirmed, the most dangerous and inflammatory elements in Blair's August package are still there: not only the effective internment power, but deportation to countries that routinely torture; banning of non-violent political parties; state control of mosques and the outlawing of any statement that might be seen as inciting or glorifying terrorist acts (including in history).
If we are fighting, as I certainly believe we are, those who would take away our freedoms and liberties, why on earth would we take them away ourselves in order to fight? I mean, what’s the damn point in that?
October 13, 2005 in Current Affairs | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c2d3e53ef00d83490f58569e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Seumas Milne.:
Comments
"If we are fighting, as I certainly believe we are, those who would take away our freedoms and liberties, why on earth would we take them away ourselves in order to fight? I mean, what’s the damn point in that?"
So it's your right to say that it was great that so many innocent people are killed by terrorists? In the not too distant past, you'd be hanged for that, but it's now somehow a right? That's probably the worst reasoned argument I've ever heard.
Tim adds: Hunh? Where did I say it was great people were killed by terrorists? You’ve lost me.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus | Oct 13, 2005 1:19:33 PM
Tim:
Because we can give them up temporarily and then get them back, at least in the US where the means of violent revolution are widely dispersed. If we were to lose the war though, we would never get them back.
Posted by: Tom Kratman | Oct 13, 2005 3:43:57 PM
There's a thin line between protecting ourselves and damaging our freedoms- and the idea that government will overturn certain legislation when a clear and present danger is past is somewhat naive in my opinion.
However, I would like to comment on one point- "deportation to countries that routinely torture".
So we might send people who pose a threat to our society to a country where they originally came from and where they might face torture? My take on this is, too bad- if they wanted to enjoy the freedoms of Britain they shouldn't now be attacking the country that has given them succour.
You reap what you sow.
Posted by: Jay.Mac | Oct 14, 2005 1:29:48 PM
