Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

UK terrorist threat exaggerated?

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

New Statesman:

Is the terrorist threat to the UK exaggerated?

 

Yes

 

72.2%

No

 

27.7%

 

COMMENTS

 

Yes

Absolutely. When are you, Brits, going to stop falling (and voting!) for

the US policy on paranoia?

Renato Brandao

8 June 2006

 

Yes

It is another example of the government utilising the politics of fear

to justify the further erosion of civil liberties.

Chris Black

8 June 2006

 

No

The threat of terror is very real. However, the fear of terrorism and

the amplification of its impact by the media cause us far more damage

than the original act itself.

Peter Davies

8 June 2006

 

Yes

Fear is a tool of bad government and is greatly overused.

Jim Dodds

8 June 2006

 

No

No, but our Government's reaction to it is! Instead of removing

traditional, and hard won, freedoms, we need to establish some control

on who is allowed to settle in our Country and on what terms they can

stay. There has never been a vote on whether this country should become

multi-racial - I suspect that if it were put to the vote the proposition

would be thrown out by a very large majority. If the population of our

Country loses its cohesion, we can expect " terrorist " acts and we are

reaping the benefits of our " open door " policy!

Alan Briggs

8 June 2006

 

Yes

Absolutely. It is exaggerated with a moron government in power in the UK

the same as it is in the US and also in Australia.

Frans B. Roos

8 June 2006

 

Yes

Canada beat us to the exaggerations this week.

Nick Georgiou

8 June 2006

 

No

The UK is becoming prgressively moslem...need i expand?

George Koumoullis

8 June 2006

 

Yes

Absolutely. Like Bush, Blair seems to want to keep the population cowed

by fear. Presumably he's realised it's the only way he continues to

garner support around the country, even when our incompetent

intelligence, security and law-enforcement services beat their way round

the country, terrorising innocent families on the basis of immensely

flimsy " evidence " .

Owen Blacker

8 June 2006

 

Yes

I think so, because it's in the interests of Blair and the Pro-war lobby

to keep us all afraid of terrorism to justify their wars and their own

state terrorism.

Garth Carthy

8 June 2006

 

Yes

There's undoubtedly a strong threat (which the Government seems hell

bent on making worse), but I'm sure it's exaggerated to try to get us to

support the 'war on terror'.

Roger Patrick

8 June 2006

 

Yes

Anything that keeps the natives thinking about anything other than this

incompetent corrupt administration is useful to New Labour!

Peter Tinsley

8 June 2006

 

Yes

The zeitgeist of the early 21st Century, politically, appears to be

about the hegemonic control of the population through the use of fear

and propaganda. The justification for the invasion or potential

invasions of Iraq, Iran, North Korea (and whoever else that does not

sign up to the West's spurious definition of democracy) is not based

upon sound consultation and argument. It is based upon the systematic

creation of fear and hate that enables enough popular support to

'justify' the oligarchies getting away with it. The media is almost

entirely complicit. It is obsessed with soundbites and assumptions when

it should be informing and liberating. Terrorism is merely another

'moral panic' that suits. It constructs sometimes real but often

mythical 'folk devils' that result in trillions being spent on killing

as well as human rights and liberty being constantly removed and

undermined by legislation. Who has been responsible for more suffering

and death - the American and British governments or al-Zarqawi and Bin

Laden?

Jason Cridland

8 June 2006

 

© New Statesman 1913 - 2006

 

http://www.newstatesman.com/nsleadercomments.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

It is the same as here: a convenience to justify changes in public

policy...rather like the convenience of the fire in Berlin in 1933.

 

Seriously, with no hyperbole, Bush and his reactions to " the terrorists " ,

real or exagerrated, have done far more harm to the nation than Bin Laudin

or any other terrorist could have ever attempted.

The Constitution is in tatters, we live as if we were in a third world

economy, and we are subject, now, to warrantless searches and

eavsedropping.Our nation endorses the use of terror- ie secret prisons,

torture, and denial of basic rights, the rejection of long accepted

protocaols suh as the Geneva Convention, etc. We invade other lands

unilaterally when it is convenient for us to do so.

 

Basically, thanks to the " reaction to terror " that Busch is proud of, we

have become the oppressive and warring nightmare that was the former Soviet

Union/ Eastern Bloc.

 

Like calls unto like, and when one picks up the tools of terror, one becomes

a terrorist.We have become what we hate, and what we profess to fight.

 

Michael

 

On Behalf Of dar

Sunday, June 11, 2006 5:38 PM

9 AltMed

UK terrorist threat exaggerated?

 

 

New Statesman:

Is the terrorist threat to the UK exaggerated?

 

Yes

 

72.2%

No

 

27.7%

 

COMMENTS

 

Yes

Absolutely. When are you, Brits, going to stop falling (and voting!) for

the US policy on paranoia?

Renato Brandao

8 June 2006

 

Yes

It is another example of the government utilising the politics of fear

to justify the further erosion of civil liberties.

Chris Black

8 June 2006

 

No

The threat of terror is very real. However, the fear of terrorism and

the amplification of its impact by the media cause us far more damage

than the original act itself.

Peter Davies

8 June 2006

 

Yes

Fear is a tool of bad government and is greatly overused.

Jim Dodds

8 June 2006

 

No

No, but our Government's reaction to it is! Instead of removing

traditional, and hard won, freedoms, we need to establish some control

on who is allowed to settle in our Country and on what terms they can

stay. There has never been a vote on whether this country should become

multi-racial - I suspect that if it were put to the vote the proposition

would be thrown out by a very large majority. If the population of our

Country loses its cohesion, we can expect " terrorist " acts and we are

reaping the benefits of our " open door " policy!

Alan Briggs

8 June 2006

 

Yes

Absolutely. It is exaggerated with a moron government in power in the UK

the same as it is in the US and also in Australia.

Frans B. Roos

8 June 2006

 

Yes

Canada beat us to the exaggerations this week.

Nick Georgiou

8 June 2006

 

No

The UK is becoming prgressively moslem...need i expand?

George Koumoullis

8 June 2006

 

Yes

Absolutely. Like Bush, Blair seems to want to keep the population cowed

by fear. Presumably he's realised it's the only way he continues to

garner support around the country, even when our incompetent

intelligence, security and law-enforcement services beat their way round

the country, terrorising innocent families on the basis of immensely

flimsy " evidence " .

Owen Blacker

8 June 2006

 

Yes

I think so, because it's in the interests of Blair and the Pro-war lobby

to keep us all afraid of terrorism to justify their wars and their own

state terrorism.

Garth Carthy

8 June 2006

 

Yes

There's undoubtedly a strong threat (which the Government seems hell

bent on making worse), but I'm sure it's exaggerated to try to get us to

support the 'war on terror'.

Roger Patrick

8 June 2006

 

Yes

Anything that keeps the natives thinking about anything other than this

incompetent corrupt administration is useful to New Labour!

Peter Tinsley

8 June 2006

 

Yes

The zeitgeist of the early 21st Century, politically, appears to be

about the hegemonic control of the population through the use of fear

and propaganda. The justification for the invasion or potential

invasions of Iraq, Iran, North Korea (and whoever else that does not

sign up to the West's spurious definition of democracy) is not based

upon sound consultation and argument. It is based upon the systematic

creation of fear and hate that enables enough popular support to

'justify' the oligarchies getting away with it. The media is almost

entirely complicit. It is obsessed with soundbites and assumptions when

it should be informing and liberating. Terrorism is merely another

'moral panic' that suits. It constructs sometimes real but often

mythical 'folk devils' that result in trillions being spent on killing

as well as human rights and liberty being constantly removed and

undermined by legislation. Who has been responsible for more suffering

and death - the American and British governments or al-Zarqawi and Bin

Laden?

Jason Cridland

8 June 2006

 

© New Statesman 1913 - 2006

 

http://www.newstatesman.com/nsleadercomments.htm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...