• Extremism

    From The Todal@21:1/5 to All on Mon Mar 4 09:06:37 2024
    Our government seems to be moving gradually towards Putin's policy of
    regarding vocal opposition to the government's policies as criminal
    subversion. Or maybe I'm exaggerating?

    From the Times today:

    quote

    Ministers are to broaden the government’s definition of extremism as
    part of a crackdown on people and groups “undermining” Britain’s institutions and values.

    Rishi Sunak has asked Michael Gove, the levelling up secretary, to
    update the government’s definition of extremism, which was first set out
    more than a decade ago. It defines extremism as “vocal or active
    opposition to fundamental British values” and is seen by the government
    as no longer being fit for purpose.

    A new definition, which is still being finalised, is expected to cover
    those whose actions more broadly “undermine” the country’s institutions or values.

    The change is significant because groups or individuals deemed to be
    extremist by ministers can be excluded from government and council
    funding and barred from working with public bodies. Senior Whitehall
    sources said that the announcement, expected later this month, would
    include a list of groups that fell foul of the new definition, but added
    that this was still being worked on and was “legally fraught”.

    unquote

    So perhaps if you write a social media post condemning Israel for its
    actions in Gaza and saying that Jewish groups in the UK have a
    disproportionate influence over our politicians, that could bar you from
    many jobs perhaps permanently. On the other hand, if you say that those marching to support Palestinian rights are hate marchers and useful
    idiots, as silly Suella has done, it is doubtful whether that will
    damage your career.

    Is George Galloway an "extremist"? Quite a few politicians and media
    pundits would say so. Do we want our politicians to be bland? Do we make
    the journey to the polling station to vote for a person who has no
    strong opinions or who keeps those opinions secret?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeff Gaines@21:1/5 to The Todal on Mon Mar 4 09:27:44 2024
    On 04/03/2024 in message <l4lh8tFs5tlU1@mid.individual.net> The Todal wrote:

    So perhaps if you write a social media post condemning Israel for its
    actions in Gaza and saying that Jewish groups in the UK have a >disproportionate influence over our politicians, that could bar you from
    many jobs perhaps permanently. On the other hand, if you say that those >marching to support Palestinian rights are hate marchers and useful
    idiots, as silly Suella has done, it is doubtful whether that will damage >your career.

    Is George Galloway an "extremist"? Quite a few politicians and media
    pundits would say so. Do we want our politicians to be bland? Do we make
    the journey to the polling station to vote for a person who has no strong >opinions or who keeps those opinions secret?

    What I found most amusing about Sunak's speech was his statement that
    democracy was being undermined followed by strong criticism of the result
    of a properly held democratic bye-election.

    One of the best ways to uphold democracy would be to ban all forms of
    lobbying and membership of lobbying groups, some of whom seem to have the
    power to tell our MPs what to do.

    --
    Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
    The fact that there's a highway to hell and only a stairway to heaven says
    a lot about anticipated traffic numbers.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From The Todal@21:1/5 to Ottavio Caruso on Mon Mar 4 10:54:17 2024
    On 04/03/2024 10:30, Ottavio Caruso wrote:
    Am 04/03/2024 um 09:06 schrieb The Todal:
    Our government seems to be moving gradually towards Putin's policy of
    regarding vocal opposition to the government's policies as criminal
    subversion. Or maybe I'm exaggerating?

    At least it is not moving towards kidnapping, raping and beheading like
    Hamas have been doing.


    We're already most of the way there. For decades, Britain has
    facilitated the American policy of "extraordinary rendition" whereby
    suspected terrorists anywere in the world will be kidnapped, taken to a
    CIA interrogation centre (often in a country other than America) and
    tortured until they confess to whatever they are expected to confess to.
    At intervals, our valiant MI6 agents will turn up and present their own
    list of questions for the unfortunate detainee.

    see eg https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jun/01/mi5-chief-right-to-be-disgusted-over-mi6-role-rendition-blair

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ottavio Caruso@21:1/5 to All on Mon Mar 4 10:30:47 2024
    Am 04/03/2024 um 09:06 schrieb The Todal:
    Our government seems to be moving gradually towards Putin's policy of regarding vocal opposition to the government's policies as criminal subversion. Or maybe I'm exaggerating?

    At least it is not moving towards kidnapping, raping and beheading like
    Hamas have been doing.

    --
    Ottavio Caruso

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Pancho@21:1/5 to The Todal on Mon Mar 4 11:50:30 2024
    On 04/03/2024 09:06, The Todal wrote:
    Our government seems to be moving gradually towards Putin's policy of regarding vocal opposition to the government's policies as criminal subversion. Or maybe I'm exaggerating?


    This has been going on for years, more under Labour than the Tories.
    1974 "Prevention of Terrorism Act". Blair introduced stunningly
    authoritarian laws. I'm sure you remember Labour using the prevention of terrorism 2005 to bar Walter Wolfgang from the Labour annual conference.

    I don't believe Starmer would be any less authoritarian.

    [snip]


    Is George Galloway an "extremist"?  Quite a few politicians and media pundits would say so. Do we want our politicians to be bland? Do we make
    the journey to the polling station to vote for a person who has no
    strong opinions or who keeps those opinions secret?


    The "hate" laws should not be about preventing criticism, they should be
    about preventing intolerance. From my point of view, the intolerance is
    being directed at Galloway, not by Galloway. I read Galloway is going to
    be shunned by parliamentarians.

    I read today that David "Thick as mince" Davis will shun him too.
    Because Galloway deputy Chris Williamson refused to condemn the Hamas
    October attack. Given that it is illegal to present justifications for
    the Hamas attack, to support them in any way, I'm not surprised
    Williamson refused to condemn them. Surely, if we are asked to condemn something, we should be allowed to hear both sides of the argument?
    Answers that cannot be questioned are religion.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jon Ribbens@21:1/5 to The Todal on Mon Mar 4 12:40:39 2024
    On 2024-03-04, The Todal <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote:
    Our government seems to be moving gradually towards Putin's policy of regarding vocal opposition to the government's policies as criminal subversion. Or maybe I'm exaggerating?

    From the Times today:

    quote

    Ministers are to broaden the government’s definition of extremism as
    part of a crackdown on people and groups “undermining” Britain’s institutions and values.

    Rishi Sunak has asked Michael Gove, the levelling up secretary, to
    update the government’s definition of extremism, which was first set out more than a decade ago. It defines extremism as “vocal or active
    opposition to fundamental British values” and is seen by the government
    as no longer being fit for purpose.

    A new definition, which is still being finalised, is expected to cover
    those whose actions more broadly “undermine” the country’s institutions or values.

    Oh come on. They must be taking the piss. There is one and only one organisation in this country which stands head and shoulders above
    all others in meeting - and exceeding - this definition, and it is
    the Conservative and Unionist Party.

    Do they just want to rub it in everyone's faces that the law only
    applies to little people and not to them?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Pamela@21:1/5 to Jeff Gaines on Mon Mar 4 18:07:35 2024
    On 09:27 4 Mar 2024, Jeff Gaines said:
    On 04/03/2024 in message <l4lh8tFs5tlU1@mid.individual.net> The Todal
    wrote:

    So perhaps if you write a social media post condemning Israel for its >>actions in Gaza and saying that Jewish groups in the UK have a >>disproportionate influence over our politicians, that could bar you
    from many jobs perhaps permanently. On the other hand, if you say that >>those marching to support Palestinian rights are hate marchers and
    useful idiots, as silly Suella has done, it is doubtful whether that
    will damage your career.

    Is George Galloway an "extremist"? Quite a few politicians and media >>pundits would say so. Do we want our politicians to be bland? Do we
    make the journey to the polling station to vote for a person who has
    no strong opinions or who keeps those opinions secret?

    What I found most amusing about Sunak's speech was his statement that democracy was being undermined followed by strong criticism of the
    result of a properly held democratic bye-election.

    The postal vote in Rochdale was a whopping 43 percent of the total.
    Postal votes are open to "vote harvesting" and the unusual proportion of
    postal votes here is concerning.

    This situation is reminiscent of the Bangladeshi vote used to elect the
    mayor of Tower Hamlets in 2014, and which was subsequently overturned.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Colin Bignell@21:1/5 to Jeff Gaines on Mon Mar 4 20:45:21 2024
    On 04/03/2024 09:27, Jeff Gaines wrote:
    On 04/03/2024 in message <l4lh8tFs5tlU1@mid.individual.net> The Todal
    wrote:

    So perhaps if you write a social media post condemning Israel for its
    actions in Gaza and saying that Jewish groups in the UK have a
    disproportionate influence over our politicians, that could bar you
    from many jobs perhaps permanently. On the other hand, if you say that
    those marching to support Palestinian rights are hate marchers and
    useful idiots, as silly Suella has done, it is doubtful whether that
    will damage your career.

    Is George Galloway an "extremist"?  Quite a few politicians and media
    pundits would say so. Do we want our politicians to be bland? Do we
    make the journey to the polling station to vote for a person who has
    no strong opinions or who keeps those opinions secret?

    What I found most amusing about Sunak's speech was his statement that democracy was being undermined followed by strong criticism of the
    result of a properly held democratic bye-election.

    Historically, the result is almost certainly not going to survive the
    general election.

    One of the best ways to uphold democracy would be to ban all forms of lobbying and membership of lobbying groups, some of whom seem to have
    the power to tell our MPs what to do.


    --
    Colin Bignell

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Owen Rees@21:1/5 to The Todal on Mon Mar 4 20:32:04 2024
    The Todal <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote:
    Our government seems to be moving gradually towards Putin's policy of regarding vocal opposition to the government's policies as criminal subversion. Or maybe I'm exaggerating?

    From the Times today:

    quote

    Ministers are to broaden the government’s definition of extremism as
    part of a crackdown on people and groups “undermining” Britain’s institutions and values.

    Rishi Sunak has asked Michael Gove, the levelling up secretary, to
    update the government’s definition of extremism, which was first set out more than a decade ago. It defines extremism as “vocal or active
    opposition to fundamental British values” and is seen by the government
    as no longer being fit for purpose.

    A new definition, which is still being finalised, is expected to cover
    those whose actions more broadly “undermine” the country’s institutions or values.

    Would that include calling judges enemies of the people?

    Would that include suggesting that there is a deep state undermining the government of the UK?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mark Goodge@21:1/5 to All on Mon Mar 4 21:32:51 2024
    On Mon, 04 Mar 2024 18:07:35 GMT, Pamela <uklm@permabulator.33mail.com>
    wrote:

    The postal vote in Rochdale was a whopping 43 percent of the total.
    Postal votes are open to "vote harvesting" and the unusual proportion of >postal votes here is concerning.

    Overall turnout was very low for a Parliamentary election. And the lower the turnout, the higher the proportion of postal voters tends to be, because
    postal voters are more likely to vote.

    Mark

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Pamela@21:1/5 to Mark Goodge on Tue Mar 5 14:05:51 2024
    On 21:32 4 Mar 2024, Mark Goodge said:

    On Mon, 04 Mar 2024 18:07:35 GMT, Pamela
    <uklm@permabulator.33mail.com> wrote:

    The postal vote in Rochdale was a whopping 43 percent of the total.
    Postal votes are open to "vote harvesting" and the unusual proportion
    of postal votes here is concerning.

    Overall turnout was very low for a Parliamentary election. And the
    lower the turnout, the higher the proportion of postal voters tends to
    be, because postal voters are more likely to vote.

    Mark

    Corerspondingly, any "vote harvesting" would have greater effect than usual
    in a low turnout.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Roger Hayter@21:1/5 to Iain Archer on Wed Mar 6 20:06:01 2024
    On 6 Mar 2024 at 19:56:01 GMT, "Iain Archer" <ianews.12@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Mon, 04 Mar 2024 09:06:37 +0000, The Todal wrote:

    Our government seems to be moving gradually towards Putin's policy of
    regarding vocal opposition to the government's policies as criminal
    subversion. Or maybe I'm exaggerating?

    From the Times today:

    quote

    Ministers are to broaden the government’s definition of extremism as
    part of a crackdown on people and groups “undermining” Britain’s
    institutions and values.

    Rishi Sunak has asked Michael Gove, the levelling up secretary, to
    update the government’s definition of extremism, which was first set out >> more than a decade ago. It defines extremism as “vocal or active
    opposition to fundamental British values” and is seen by the government
    as no longer being fit for purpose.

    A new definition, which is still being finalised, is expected to cover
    those whose actions more broadly “undermine” the country’s institutions
    or values.

    The change is significant because groups or individuals deemed to be
    extremist by ministers can be excluded from government and council
    funding and barred from working with public bodies. Senior Whitehall
    sources said that the announcement, expected later this month, would
    include a list of groups that fell foul of the new definition, but added
    that this was still being worked on and was “legally fraught”.

    unquote

    My moderately diligent trawl of legislation.gov.uk didn't find any prior definition of extremism; mainly just enablings of funding to combat it.

    Its 'complement', "fundamental British values", seems always to be
    expressed as an explicit formulaic enumeration rather than alone: eg

    "5. The standard about the spiritual, moral, social and cultural
    development of pupils at the school is met if the proprietor—

    "(a) actively promotes the fundamental British values of democracy,
    the rule of law, individual liberty, and mutual respect and tolerance
    of those with different faiths and beliefs; ..."

    from the Schedule to the Education (Independent School Standards)
    Regulations 2014. SI 2014/3283

    Which I suspect a majority would probably largely approve. Nothing
    said explicitly about freedom of thought and speech and the exceptions thereto, though I presume they can all be deemed corollaries.

    Has freedom of speech ever been a popular idea in this country? We think we must have it because we hear all about it in American media, but it is certainly not an undisputed right in this country.

    I remember as a child being told about Speakers' Corner at Hyde Park, where anyone can stand up and promulgate any ideas they wished, and even then I wondered about the corollary, which was that at most public places this would not be tolerated

    A prominent "British value" seems to be not questioning how things are done in this country!

    --

    Roger Hayter

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)