John Reid: Next stop internet


by Al-Hack
26th October, 2006 at 5:30 pm    

After ticking off Muslim parents for not controlling their kids and getting into silly things like terrorism, commander-in-chief John Reid has now turned his sights to the internet.

Ministers from the six largest European Union countries have agreed to work together to make the internet a “more hostile” place for terrorists.

Home Secretary John Reid said they would seek to crack down on people using the web to share information on explosives or spread propaganda.

He said the interior ministers wanted to use the internet and other media to target young audiences with messages from “secular Muslim” role models, rather than those believing in radical ideologies.

The idea is so proposterous it beggars belief. Maybe Reid should explain: (a) How exactly will he control the internet? Will British jurisdiction extend to countries such as Indonesia for example? (b) Which intelligent Muslim will want to work with this charging bull? It don’t matter how secular or liberal one is – going near New Labour acts like a plague for your credibility. (c) What is “propaganda” defined as? Answers on the back of a postcard to Belmarsh please.


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Civil liberties,Party politics






19 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs


  1. Leon — on 26th October, 2006 at 5:39 pm  

    Heh, great minds eh Al-Hack, I had just opened up word to post about this story!:D

  2. ZinZin — on 26th October, 2006 at 5:44 pm  

    This is from a govt unable to control internet gambling.

  3. Sunny — on 26th October, 2006 at 6:38 pm  

    John Reid has lost his brain somewhere. Seriously.
    *shakes his head*

  4. ZinZin — on 26th October, 2006 at 6:45 pm  

    Sunny what an arrogant statement.
    Presuming that Reid had a brain in the first place.

  5. Yakoub/Julaybib — on 26th October, 2006 at 7:04 pm  

    Proof, if proof were needed, that the UK government is pursuing a policy derived from The Rand Report. In fact, Reid mentioned the report during his visit to an East London Mosque, but locals were flummoxed by their attempts to search Google for ‘Round Report’ (groan!)

    Wasalaam

    TMA

  6. Sahil — on 26th October, 2006 at 7:08 pm  

    This is just posturing like the non-binding commitment to control immigration from Romania and Bulgaria. Both times he’s appealed to daily mail et al, and both times, it means absolutely nothing. Is this all the home office does?

  7. Isaa — on 26th October, 2006 at 7:59 pm  

    The following website was partly funded by the Home Office. If they stick to stuff like this, it’s not too bad, there’s some sensible voices on here.

    http://www.radicalmiddleway.co.uk/

  8. Southpaw — on 26th October, 2006 at 8:00 pm  

    It’s not preposterous at all.

    He doesn’t need to control Indonesian websites. He just needs to get them blocked by ISPs in the UK (Saudi Arabia and China does this already) or possibly make it an offence to download (and surf?) certain stuff in the way that child pornography on the net is ‘illegal’.

    The answer to the question ‘Which intelligent Muslim will want to work with this charging bull? is ‘The usual suspects’. The self appointed community leaders (be they Muslim, Sikh, Jew, Atheist or Christian) who welcome the chance of an OBE, a council seat, tea with the cops or getting more funds to their organisation (and maybe for themselves).

    You’re correct that anyone of independent thought will give no credibility to such puppets but the State is more sophisticated than that. I expect them to have raised their game and work so that their financial and organisational support for a website, a newspaper, commentators and other opinion formers isn’t so obvious.

    But it will still be easy to see who are their collaborators and placemen.
    What are these people saying? In whose interest are they speaking? Do they echo the sentiments of the rulers, the capitalists, shareholders or small businessmen or do they champion the interests of workers, the occupied and the oppressed of all religions and none?

  9. Kulvinder — on 26th October, 2006 at 10:43 pm  

    The internet is full of paedophiles, violent pornography and terrorism. It must be harshly controlled and watched by upstanding members of society (mainly politicians and the police) very intently. Obviously us mere plebs would run amock were we to allow ourselves to be exposed to the internet…but the police and john reid protect us by looking at movies of naked children suicide bombing bdsm palours so we don’t have to. Gawd bless them.

  10. Mr Brown — on 26th October, 2006 at 11:13 pm  

    If, as it seems from these comments, PP’s are against Mr Reid’s endeavor, are PP’s also against the campaign to gag RedWatch?

  11. Yakoub/Julaybib — on 27th October, 2006 at 12:02 am  

    I call the radical middle way ‘the radical authoritarian way’. Essentially it’s asking Muslims to concur with medieval dogma, updated for the apolitical middle class Muslims living in Britain. Q-News are massive supporters of the radical unthinking way.

    E.g. One of its key ideologues, Hamza Yusuf, was asked by Mark Lawson on BBC 3 about Muslims engaging in politics. Hamza replied (true to RMW scholarly ‘thinking’) that Islam is essentially ‘dystopic’ and, whatever happens, things will never get that much better with the world. Best stick to charity, he said.

    So why does Hamza like to appear on BBC Question Time? Send your answers on a postcard to Shazia Mirza.

    Wasalaam

    TMA

  12. Kulvinder — on 27th October, 2006 at 9:50 am  

    PP’s also against the campaign to gag RedWatch?

    yes?!

  13. sonia — on 27th October, 2006 at 10:43 am  

    11 – Yakoub interesting.

    what a nutty thing to go on tv and say. bet he did himself lots of favours!

    why do all these men call themselves Sheikh this person or that!

    radical middle way sounds like a funny name to me.

  14. sonia — on 27th October, 2006 at 10:51 am  

    most of the radical middle way scholars appear to be american – and whats with all this descended from the ‘noble’ family of the Prophet? how ‘kingly’ and totally un-equalist. trying to claim legitimacy on the back of something else – very dodgy.

    well since net neutrality went down the tubes – this sort of stuff is all going to be made much easier.

  15. TheFriendlyInfidel — on 27th October, 2006 at 11:21 am  

    Hi Sunny,

    I think that you should stop likning to BBC news website for your stories as it is not a good source. For instance did you know that this piece has had 11 versions, has changed its title 3 times and has two complete rewrites?

    The BBC is affectly an unquotable news site that is obessed with polictal correctness and spin.

    See for yourself how the reporting on this artical has changed:

    http://newssniffer.newworldodour.co.uk/articles/8173/diff/10/11

    Newssniffer is my new most favorite site.

    Cheers,

    TFI

  16. TheFriendlyInfidel — on 27th October, 2006 at 11:27 am  

    Whoops sorry Al hack … your not sunny.

    Here is first compared to the last version on the site

    http://newssniffer.newworldodour.co.uk/articles/8173/diff/0/11

    TFI
    (where does he get those wonderful toys?)

  17. Arif — on 27th October, 2006 at 11:49 am  

    Islam is being so politicised by Governments in Muslim countries, resistence groups and counter-insurgency psy-ops and so on, it has become just too murky for me to want to align with any group or other.

    I like the radical middle way. But I admit I am put off by its Home Office funding. I admire Hamza Yusuf etc but the complex jurisprudence and theological reasoning go over my head, so I let the clash of daleels continue elsewhere – including on zillions of emotionally charged internet sites.

    So Government agencies will plant more stuff, censor others for our own good. I guess if you really trust Government agencies there is no problem with this. But on some important dimensions I consider this government’s ideology little better than those it wishes to censor or corrupt.

    And a possible upshot is that anything non-violent peace and justice seeking Muslims say will be considered by most Muslims as Government propaganda to stigmatise legitimate resistence by OBE seeking sell-outs, unless it is censored by the Government believing we are covertly glorifying terrorism and giving comfort to the enemy by challenging State violence.

    Not much chance of being part of a progressive social movement in such an atmosphere. And so I will return to the murkiness to work with anyone, without letting suspicions separate me from others trying to do the same.

  18. Kismet Hardy — on 27th October, 2006 at 2:48 pm  

    ‘So Government agencies will plant more stuff’

    That’s so true. I woke up this morning with an electronic chip implanted into my encephalon that told me to go out and buy dry-weave top sheets and wear them on my face, somehow fashioning the wings into rather fetching sideburns. I look like an idiot but I blame the government. No idea why I’m sharing this with you, but let’s face it, no one in the real world wants to know. I blame this on the fact that I’m a muslim

  19. Chris Stiles — on 27th October, 2006 at 5:23 pm  


    If, as it seems from these comments, PP’s are against Mr Reid’s endeavor, are PP’s also against the campaign to gag RedWatch?

    Yes – I am against Redwatch being banned. I also believe that where their behaviour slips into harassment they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law [and the laws that targetted animal rights extremists would be apposite here].

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.