Slashdot Mirror
Terrorist Murder In London Could Revive Snooper's Charter
judgecorp writes "Supporters of the Communications Data Bill (also known as the Snooper's Charter) have lost no time in calling for the Bill to be revived, in response to yesterday's brutal murder of a soldier on the streets of Woolwich, South London. The Bill would have allowed monitoring of all online communications — including who people contact and what websites they visit — but was shelved after Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg opposed it, effectively splitting Britain's coalition government on the issue. Now the fear of new terrorism could rekindle support, based on the argument that even 'lone wolf' attackers use the Internet."
Because those are the sorts of people you want as leaders.
Not you specifically, obviously, but enough people in America want admnistrations like that of Bush and Obama that a majority are voting them into power. It's exactly your last three words that are responsible for it, fear and stupidity, but if you're wondering WHY you can't be more like an actual democratic state, it's because a majority of your people don't want one.
Maybe the real question you need to ask is, "never mind why we aren't like Norway, why are we the way we are NOW?"
That the Snooper's Charter will reduce the threat of Terrorism is an untested hypothesis. Prove it will achieve such goals, THEN we'll talk about having it be a law.
As one of my colleagues often says to me, "you're being rational again". Politics doesn't follow the scientific method. The British tabloids (which are already pretty xenophobic) will be cranking up the FUD level to the max. When the idea get's enough mindshare among their readers, the politicians will follow the votes.
First, this wasn't terrorism, it was war. Killing a soldier of a nation that kills people in a nation you view as "your" nation is not terrorism, it's plain war. Well, at least it's every bit war as drone attacks in Yemen and Pakistan are war. Or are the soldiers controlling the drones from Texas terrorists and killers?
And: Snooping on all Internet communications to catch "lone wolf" terrorists is a War on the People, nothing less.
This isn't going to end well and this "attack" (on one soldier, OMG) is the smallest part of it. There are people in Britain knived down in the streets every day. Two guys decide to change the course of history and everybody is helping to get the job done. Just great, really.
There were plenty of cases of Germans attacking the Third Reich, more obviously there were several attempts by Germans to assassinate Hitler. That didn't make WWII a civil war. Just an international war with some within the country opposed to it.
For sure the Third Reich would have called it terrorism.
Crime, Terrorism, Political act, Resistance, Freedom Fighting. All these things are a matter of perspective. Each using terms to mould the events to the way they see it.
[Godwin smodwin]
Which doesn't in any way mean I have any sympathy for the event in Woolwich, but equally I don't have any sympathy for the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq. I abhor violence.
OK, as this appears to be as good a point as any to say this:
I'm a Londoner.
We do not yell, we do not go weak at the knees.
We have been bombed in more ways I care to count, We've been stabbed more times than I care to mention.
We don't fap and we don't fuss, we keep going because that's the only thing to do.
This wasn't an attack by Muslims, this was an attack by cowards.
Nothing more, we should spit on their pitiful self importance.
Anything else is terrorism so be careful of your hearts as that where it resides.
We, London, continue.
And a non muslim has tried to set a mosque with people in it alight.
So that's a terrorist attack too?
And how come this isn't a terrorist attack:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/may/23/swedish-riots-stockholm
Swedish riots rage for fourth night
Stockholm riots
Police attacked in Stockholm suburbs as protest against youth unemployment and poverty spreads
Why do Muslims feel solidarity with all the world's Muslims? My understanding of secular modern life is...
Short answer: Because with muslims, they're muslims first and last. Anything else is non-relevant, oh and secular modern life is haram, much like free speech in most cases. Especially with the rise of islamo-fascism. Never mind that the UK has quite a problem with muslims, I mean "asians" and their sex grooming gangs too. Well whatever, they'd rather turn to political correctness over an issue then look at the actual problem.
Om, nomnomnom...
I was doing a little research for a question below and wanted to make sure that I had the facts before posting (a sin, I know) but it did lead me to an interesting article.
What definition of the term includes this horrific act of violence but excludes the acts of the US, the UK and its allies?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/23/woolwich-attack-terrorism-blowback
It is worth reading and made me think a bit. That's always a good thing, right? So, I recalled reading some comments about it up-thread and figured I'd share the link with you as you too may find it interesting. One of the good things about the internet is that it enables people to bring questions like this to the forefront and enables us to discuss and learn. For those of us who recall the pre-internet days the contrast is startling.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."