baldysblog.co.uk

I just couldn’t resist this graphic because whilst I suspect that Jaqui Smith is a genuine person even if not the sharpest tool in the box, she has become in some strange way the very image of a besieged Gordon Brown Government. I am sure to her family, she is “just trying to do her job” but, having come into Cabinet at the “fag end” of a failing administration, somehow her face and body language, illustrates it all so perfectly.

It is obvious that since the events of 7/7 when British born Muslims blew themselves and over 50 other people with them on the Tube and a bus in London, the spotlight of suspicion has fallen very heavily on the British Muslim community within the UK and in reality, that is not unfair given that large numbers of them live in virtual ghettos and barely interact with the “natives” of these islands.

Whilst some young militant Muslim men like to talk loosely about “my Muslim brothers”, the reality is that there is little overall cohesion within the UK Muslim community as the response to those events showed, a bit of “denial”, bewilderment and no clear voice to explain, exult or condemn those deeds. Also at the international level, there is little cohesion between Muslims either, merely ‘marriages of convenience’. However, 7/7 and its aftermath for the UK is a far broader topic which we need to examine closely.

The Labour Party and Legislation

The foolishness of this Labour Government when it comes to framing legislation defies any concept of common sense let alone any suggestion of any intellect being used in the drafting process or, any effective scrutiny by the various members and committees of the Commons during the progress of the Bill.

As an example, apparently the latest consequence of that farcical “Human Rights Act” is that the Royal Navy has been advised that if they capture Pirates and bring them on-board ship, they could possibly claim asylum in the UK. If they came from a country such as Somalia, they could not be handed over to the Somali Authorities because under Muslim Law such Pirates maybe executed or at least, have hands amputated for theft, in either case the consequences would be that ‘their – the Pirates – human rights’ had been violated – what bollocks !

Now let me be frank, I’ve got nothing personally against Somali or ‘other’ Pirates but to be honest, do I really give a fig for their “human rights” when clearly this is a concept way beyond their comprehension ? Do I think that the British taxpayer who is paying for our Navy to patrol international waters for the benefit of all, wants to pay up for some “gang of failed Pirates” to claim asylum here ? I think not, we have such a mob already called “Gordon’s Unthinkable s” – The British Government.

Whether Human Rights, ID Cards, the EU Constitution or too numerous Criminal Justice Bills, this Government has demonstrated that it has no concept of the consequences of its actions and is most likely, totally unfit to govern Pond Life, yet alone the UK.

A Western Arrogance

Following the fuss surrounding the Olympic Torch, I totally disagree with the notion that China should adhere to behaviour that we consider “acceptable” to our sensibilities, that is arrogance beyond belief. Gordon Brown cannot deal properly with a population of 60 million in the UK, what chance someone like him from the West dealing with x22 that number – 1.321 billion ?

Whatever happens in China and whatever happens in Tibet will inevitably be a “Chinese Solution” of some kind, it will not be a western solution. By the same token, the solutions that will emerge in Iraq and Afghanistan will be ones that are compatible with the history and culture of those two countries. There is absolutely no “Divine Western Template” that we should insist applies to all countries at all times which, one might add, is exactly why the EU will eventually fall apart.

For those who object fiercely to what China is doing in Tibet, there are only two possible courses of action, an armed conflict to ‘liberate’ Tibet or, economic warfare by boycotting goods made in China which are probably two thirds of most consumer goods sold in this country. Given the size of our Armed Forces, the reluctance of most EU countries to actually fight anybody, the first (military) option is out. Given individual selfishness on the part of consumers in the West, I guess the second (boycott), option is also out.

If the Chinese were to attempt to impose their way of dealing with dissent in the UK or anywhere in the West, yes it would be right to oppose them militarily, this is our country and what is true for us, is also true for them. Whether you travel to Saudi Arabia, China or any other country, it is both common courtesy and common sense, to respect the way than society works, if it doesn’t suit you, don’t go there, if it doesn’t suit you, don’t live there because it is their society, not yours, join it or not as you please but always accept that it will evolve and change at its pace, not yours.

The Host Society

British society needs to take a look, not just at Muslims but at any incoming group of immigrants who wish to settle in the UK, there need to be defined expectations for both sides, rules need to be established, explained clearly and, enforced rigorously. It is right that immigrants from say, the Indian sub-continent who wish to settle in the UK, should both adhere to our laws and abandon any ‘customs’ that we find unacceptable such as “honour killings”, “forced marriages” and so on.

If they cannot agree with this and even if they were born in the UK, they should sell up, take their possessions with them and leave – end of story. And for any who would accuse me of being “racist” in this, I would also point out that each year there is an increasing outflow of indigenous British people to other countries in the Anglo Sphere because the UK today no longer represents the country they want to live in. As in all things, it cuts both ways.

Speaking as an Englishman of Catholic and Anglo/Irish origins, there is a valid comparison between Muslims today and Catholics in Britain since the Reformation, both communities are or were seen potentially as “the enemy within” and it is with this in mind, I personally demand fairness.

We as the “host society” should be precise by always being even handed, follow our ancient and established principles in all things and especially in the framing of Law. The incomers too have a responsibility to behave in an open way and be prepared to integrate and participate in the society they have decided to join of their own free will, we live in a very crowded country, people need to be involved but regardless of race, religion or creed, this is a wholly secular society.

However, I think that most of the “Anti-Terror” legislation passed by this Government is flawed politically driven by a “something must be done” mentality and socially with laws that can be portrayed as obviously aimed at just one sector of society, Muslims. We suffered a mainland bombing campaign by the IRA over many years, there were no calls for legislation of this type then, I don’t see the need for it now. The 42 Days is spurious anyway as under existing emergency legislation they could have something like 56 days and the concept of “storing up laws” for potential future use, is a very bad principle indeed.

New Laws

It could well be argued that given what is now possible using easily available technology that anyone can get hold of, the whole area of criminal detection now requires a different “structure” and a different “investigative” process. That Parliament should take some time to look at the whole area of “serious crime” is correct but this bit of hasty legislation is driven by the Government being seen to “have done something” so that they won’t get blamed if there is another 7/7 which is not a good motivation.

If we look at Internet fraud, human trafficking, prostitution, drugs and issues such as “witness protection” quite apart from terrorist plots, we might come to the conclusion that under various circumstances, there might be the need to modify the process of arrest, interrogation and being charged or released. For any number of crimes, a suspect may need to be detained in custody but set against a whole series of checks and balances.

The current proposal for 42 days with the House having to decide upon it within 30 days for each case (?), sounds a total nonsense. Look at the whole situation by all means, Computers and the Internet have delivered great benefits to western society but, we are not putting enough public money into creating a proper “Cyber-Crime” capability within the UK law enforcement establishment and probably the same applies to “Cyber-Warfare” potential as well. Time this Government stopped farting around with band aids and got on with doing the proper job of defending the Realm and its ancient values rather than “hounding” one section of the UK population.

One Response to “No to 42 Days”