Orwell was right!

[nacktman]

Orwell was right ... though about twenty years off on the schedule.
Here is the latest insanity from across the pond ...
*****
Britain's breaking new ground in the slide into a total surveillance state: as of the end of this month, domestic passengers at the new Heathrow Terminal 5 will be fingerprinted and photographed twice, to "ensure the passenger boarding the aircraft is the same person." The airport says they'll only keep it for 24h -- unless the police need them to keep it longer. This will all but eliminate terrorism.
Oh, wait, no.
That only works if terrorists are so picky about which domestic flight they blow up that they have to blow up one coming from terminal 5.
Well, I suppose that if you're the kind of lazy suicide bomber who believes in dying for the cause -- but not if it means rebooking your ticket or, you know, driving to Stansted or Gatwick or East Midlands or Manchester, this'll work. And that sounds like a pretty good adversary analysis. We all know how easily dissuaded suicide bombers are.
Time to buy stock in the train companies.

"Even if domestic passengers have a passport with them, they will still have to go through the biometric checks. Dr Gus Hosein, of the London School of Economics, an expert on the impact on technology on civil liberties, is one of the scheme’s strongest critics.
He said: "There is no other country in the world that requires passengers travelling on internal flights to be fingerprinted. BAA says the fingerprint data will be destroyed, but the records of who has travelled within the country will not be, and it will provide a rich source of data for the police and intelligence agencies.
"I grew up in a society where you only fingerprinted people if you suspected them of being criminals. By doing this they will make innocent people feel like criminals.
"There will also be a suspicion that this is the thin end of the wedge, that we are being softened up by making fingerprinting seem normal in the run-up to things like ID cards."

*****
How long do you think it will take for the misanthropic wankers on this side of the pond to try to do the same thing?

[LamontCranston]

I re-read George Orwell's 1984 last summer. You should too.
It's quite frightening really how much in there has come to pass.

He describes three states perpetually at war. Two against each other while the third is an ally. Then it switches and the other two are at war while the former enemy is the ally. And the people back home just get news reports and no real substance.

Sounds a lot like the the Cold War versus the ex-Soviet Union shifting to the Global War on Terrorism (both seemingly unending with no real battles or milestones).

Plus he describes pervasive surveillance. The same kind of phone tapping, wireless location tracing, and video everywhere of everything that we see today.

Next is torture which is creeping into public conciousness. Outrageous now, but it'll grow on people. You'll see.

Read 1984. It's an eye-opener.

[KirkOntario]

Great thread. Britain has absolutely gone the way of Orwell using double speak and banning phrases like 'war on teror' and relabelling domestic terrorist threats and incidents as 'anti-islamic activity'. Just more liberal hand-wringing and stupidity while Britain faces threats....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?ct=5&in_article_id=508901&in_page_id=1770

"Ministers have adopted a new language for declarations on Islamic terrorism.

In future, fanatics will be referred to as pursuing "anti-Islamic activity".


Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said that extremists were behaving contrary to their faith, rather than acting in the name of Islam.



Security officials believe that directly linking terrorism to Islam is inflammatory, and risks alienating mainstream Muslim opinion."

[Nativenude]

It’s just another example of our governments growing policies that all citizens are guilty of something, therefore have to be controlled, even at the total cost of all our freedoms. Course there is the bonus to those in government of nearly unlimited taxes “needed” to protect us from ourselves. It’s perplexing that anyone could support policies for yet larger government when those politicians are so addicted to the power and now crave TOTAL CONTROL.
“government for the people---” is quickly becoming “people (enslaved) for the government----”

[Naturist Mark]

I rather like the idea of labeling jihadist terrorism as 'anti-Islamic activity'. It is both an accurate description and it shames those who support the terrorism.

[usmc1]

I re-read George Orwell's 1984 last summer. You should too.
It's quite frightening really how much in there has come to pass.

He describes three states perpetually at war. Two against each other while the third is an ally. Then it switches and the other two are at war while the former enemy is the ally. And the people back home just get news reports and no real substance.

Sounds a lot like the the Cold War versus the ex-Soviet Union shifting to the Global War on Terrorism (both seemingly unending with no real battles or milestones).

Plus he describes pervasive surveillance. The same kind of phone tapping, wireless location tracing, and video everywhere of everything that we see today.

Next is torture which is creeping into public conciousness. Outrageous now, but it'll grow on people. You'll see.

Read 1984. It's an eye-opener.

Today, Bush boasts of his veto of the bill which would have banned the method of torture euphemistically called water boarding while key members of congress are crayfishing on their support of a bill prohibiting warrantless wiretaps and removing retroactive protection for the telecoms who illegally engaged in such activity.

So, America will continue to torture, abandon the rule of law and judicial oversight, and spy on its citizens and provide retroactive immunity to the multi-national corporations who join in and facilitate the spying.

War is peace. Torture is merely extreme interrogation. Spying on citizens is saving lives. Be afraid, the enemy is everywhere. He may even be the one popping the popcorn at your movie theater. Be alert, report suspicious activity.

[KirkOntario]

I rather like the idea of labeling jihadist terrorism as 'anti-Islamic activity'. It is both an accurate description and it shames those who support the terrorism.

Shames them? They don't listen to the 'Kuffar.'

I suppose we should now label criminals 'anti-lawful' then and shame them into reforming themselves?

[KirkOntario]

Looks like the new Orwellian tool is "Obama-speak". Say one thing in public and another thing in private. Is that 'change'? First we found out that his anti-Nafta talk was all just campaign rhetoric and now this aide who resigned from his campaign now reveals that the man who so famously 'voted against the war' doesn't mean what he says about troop withdrawals.....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080307/ap_on_el_pr/obama_adviser

"WASHINGTON - A former adviser to Barack Obama who resigned Friday after calling rival Hillary Rodham Clinton "a monster" said Obama may not be able to withdraw all U.S. combat troops from Iraq within a year as he has promised on the campaign trail.

Power's comments about Iraq came in an interview with the BBC. She said Obama's position is that withdrawing all U.S. troops within 16 months is a "best-case scenario" that he will revisit if he becomes president."

[Naturist Mark]

Shames them? They don't listen to the 'Kuffar.'


Now now, be careful whom you call an infidel, TOS you know.

Of course I don't think the terrorists are particularly susceptible to shame, I referred to those who support their goals, like the 61% of Iraqis who support the killing of American troops.

Or the 29% of Americans who support George Bush's killing sprees.

Perhaps we should rename W's crusades the "War Against American Values" or "Guns for Insecurity" or "Bush is killing Brown People so he doesn't have to kill you". See - both more truthful, and shame inducing.


I suppose we should now label criminals 'anti-lawful' then and shame them into reforming themselves?

I can't think of any mass constituency that supports street crime, other than the criminals themselves, but if there was a pro-street crime movement, I suppose a terminology change that skewers their reason for supporting it would make sense.

-Mark

[nacktman]

Read 1984. It's an eye-opener.

Yes, it is.
Reading it is a must for anyone with any sense.
It is a crying shame some won't, they will remain ignorant, belligerent and full of themselves and demand everyone else to be just as they are.

I would also recommend Animal Farm it will scare the bejesus out of anyone with a wit of sense.

[KirkOntario]

Animal Farm. Great book about communist revolution and what happens under 'egalitarian' government.

[Naturist Mark]

Looks like the new Orwellian tool is "Obama-speak". Say one thing in public and another thing in private. Is that 'change'? First we found out that his anti-Nafta talk was all just campaign rhetoric

Wrongo Bongo (http://www.clothesfreeforum.com/showpost.php?p=186506&postcount=22)

[KirkOntario]

Wrongo Bongo (http://www.clothesfreeforum.com/showpost.php?p=186506&postcount=22)

Is that some sort of attack on Obama's African-American heritage? Sorry, I don't understand why you would use a word like that in talking about Obama v. Hillary.

[nacktman]

Animal Farm. Great book about communist revolution and what happens under 'egalitarian' government.

Wrong! It is about a socialist revolution. Socialism and Communism are two very different things.

Socialism has two divisions and those are Fascism and Totalitarianism. Both begin as egalitarian ... that is how they subvert control from the people.

Communism is the oldest form of governance we humans devised and only works in small groups and the only people on the planet today and for the last several hundred years using the communist form of governance are the Bushmen of sub-Saharan Africa. There may be other groups in the deep jungles of the Asian Pacific rim - in fact there are groups we know exist but we don't much or anything about them.

That trite little paper Marx and Ingalls wrote is not about communism it is about socialism - they misnamed it as have those adhering to it's tenets or railing against them.

[Naturist Mark]

Is that some sort of attack on Obama's African-American heritage? Sorry, I don't understand why you would use a word like that in talking about Obama v. Hillary.

LOL

Nope, it is just my response to the drumbeat of incorrect information.