So.. terror attacks mean...

... we have to give up some of our freedom in order to protect ourselves from these threats, according to politicians. They should have kept the bas*ard in custody without charge for 60 days. then he might understand what the rest of the country thins to 'emergency terror legislation'. But oh noes.. I'm a politician these laws shouldn't apply to me.

hypercritical tossers!

Rights, responsibilities and rule of law

A democracy is not an anarchy.

Where one has rights, responsibilities and rule of law the other has naught.

It seems amazing how many tory MPs wield a sword of righteousness, shiela of justice (or was it truth and shield?) just before ending up in the clink?

Who knew..?

So the Speaker tells the Commons that he knew nothing about any of this until after it went down, and Jacqui Smith and Gordon Brown both deny any foreknowledge too.

Either the Sergeant-At-Arms is incapable of doing her job due to lack of basic knowledge (she should know the Police need a Warrant to search somewhere, and that the person targetted - *or a nominated responsible person* - should be present when the search is done to make sure there is no "funny business") or she was told to let them through with the mimimum of fuss; either way, the Speaker should step down since he is responsible for making sure his staff do their job properly - which she clearly failed to do.

A Senior figure in Government must have signed off on the raid - even the Met can't be so thick as to imagine they can just go trampling through the seat of our nation's Government - and one of the most secure buildings in the country (supposedly) - where there could be all sorts of private, confidential, and Classified (Restricted, Secret, etc) material stored.

As an Opposition minister, Green would (should...) have access to exactly the same material as his counterpart in Government - which would include documents etc the average Policeman would not be cleared to see - hence the need for special permission for the search.

Since this goes straight to the heart of our nation's governmental process, it should be a VERY senior figure indeed - Home Secretary or Prime Minister level. And as the person with overall responsibility for the security of the Houses of Parliament, surely it is down to the Speaker of the House to make sure nobody gets in without permission.

So either Our Glorious Leaders and their underling are lying through their teeth (again) or they are completely fucking incompetent. Where was this sort of access when Tony Blair was being investigated? Where was this sort of treatment when Gordon Brown was revealing Conservative party internal memos? Where were the Nu Labour "Mental Hygene Police" when the anti-Sleaze government ministers (David Blunkett and Robin Cook to name but two) were exchanging pillow talk with their respective extra-marital fuckbuddies?

Leaking counter-terror plans I can understand as grounds for this sort of behaviour.

Leaking the fact that the Government employs illegal immigrants (obviously without any sort of checks) IS NOT a valid reason. Especially if those illegals are employed in the very department that is supposed to be making sure this country is safe...

SO, cover up the fact you put the public at risk and you can get away with it.

Reveal that government ministers are blatantly ignoring the law AND LYING ABOUT IT and get arrested.

Maybe we should drop the use of "Stalinist" to describe this government - at least Josef Vissarionovich had the balls to admit when he was fucking the people over rather than trying to tell us it is for our own good...