David Cameron announced a new initiative to counteract terrorism. Among other things he is proposing the establishment of Extremism Disruption Orders. Exactly what is involve with these orders?
the Guardian wrote:They would include a ban on broadcasting and a requirement to submit to the police in advance any proposed publication on the web and social media or in print. The bill will also contain plans for banning orders for extremist organisations which seek to undermine democracy or use hate speech in public places, but it will fall short of banning on the grounds of provoking hatred.
It will also contain new powers to close premises including mosques where extremists seek to influence others. The powers of the Charity Commission to root out charities that misappropriate funds towards extremism and terrorism will also be strengthened.
Let me see if I have this right. The British government wants to have authority to
ban certain broadcasts
review publications before put in print or in social media
ban certain organizations from public speeches
have authority to close mosques, and
root out charities deemed to be misappropriating funds
Woah That is quite a conservative agenda. But I am not the only one concerned about it.
A top Anglican theologian [Rev. Mike Ovey] has warned that traditional Christian teaching, such as believing that Jesus is the son of God, could become "criminalized" in the U.K. in light of the government's new anti-extremism orders
Woah, and double Woah
What is going on over there? I realize terrorism is a problem, but who gets to decide what is disruptive? This is not good and it's hard for me to believe David Cameron is serious about it.
Scary, but not surpising. I've been bemoaning the "police state" here in the US for years, for all that anyone cares...too many folks STILL go around saying "well, if you've got nothing to hide, what are you worried about?" In the meantime, they'll sit at home like couch potatoes, glued to the television, watching the latest sitcoms and "Dancing With the Stars" and the latest "reality" crap while remaining completely oblivious to the real, very scary news that our privacy and our rights are being whittled away, bit by bit. I daresay that the same thing is going on in the UK, too...and the people over there are, more than likely, just as stupid as the ones on this side of the pond.
"The miracle is this: the more we share, the more we have." -- Leonard Nimoy (1931-2015)
The proposals seem very "police state", but the terrorist threat can't be under-estimated on our small island. People've been complaining in letters to newspapers and lobbying MPs to do something constructive, instead of allowing "free speech" in terms of terrorist activity. Certain mosques, colleges and other establishments've been found to be breeding grounds for drawing young and impressionable people to be radicalised, and it's widely known that terrorist groups use social media sites to spread their propaganda. Doing something to stop it isn't so much taking away people's rights as to try and put an end to this sort of activity.
The more press these groups get, the better they like it, as they function on playing on people's fears, but their presence's very real, and a recent survey showed that a high percentage of Muslims agreed with extremist ideas. This's very worrying and shocked the government (who're always behind on what's really happening). We've been too soft on these people, allowing them to come to our shores and take advantage of what's been offered to them. Meanwhile, these groups are watching their numbers swell, and anything which helps to prevent them advertising their evil ideas has to be good. Under the guise of being a "charity", a lot of money's been raised to line the terrorists pockets, so it's obvious that if this can be stopped, the better it'll be for us all.
The Rev. Mike Ovey makes a few good points, but says that there has to be a better way of doing things. I wonder what he suggests? The Christian teaching of tolerance and kindness isn't working with these extremists. The religious beliefs of westerners shouldn't be abolished or forced underground, but as he says, some people've been arrested for speaking out and appearing homophobic, for instance. At the same time, groups which'd like to see our democracy crushed to the ground are still allowed to walk round with placards saying "death to the infidel", and grouping together to spread their own beliefs. Any complaints are seen as trying to take away freedom of speech, and so it's been ruled that they can carry on.
This can't be right, and something has to be done to try and stop these people from spreading their hatred. Unfortunately, it comes across as dictatorship, but David Cameron knows that he would've been more popular if he'd done something earlier. The people want a strong government who're going to do something concrete to stop these groups from flourishing. If the proposals upset or include the innocent, these people have it in their power to stop their own from terrorist leanings, but are either too afraid or ignorant to do anything about it.
So, what do we do? David Cameron knows that the British people've had enough and'll take things into their own hands if something isn't seen to be done. He can't risk anarchy, so puts forward a list of proposals which he hopes might lessen the danger to our country and show him in a better/stronger light. It's no good bleating when the damage's done. Sometimes hard choices have to be made, even at the expense of removing certain liberties. The church's afraid of losing its hold on society, and folk being forced out of their livelihoods. It's about time they all looked at their archaic teachings. What used to work, doesn't any more. Mike Ovey says: "(Mr. Cameron's) measures could very easily be used to target preachers and the curriculum of colleges such as his". Yes indeed, but I feel that there needs to be some sort of re-adjustment within the church. With our scientific and logical approach to life, it does seem a little odd that Jesus's still classed as the Son of God. He was a prophet, yes, but the western world's still taught that he was more than that, and our societies've been built on this ancient teaching. No proof; no point in fighting about it. Acceptance of all religions is the key, but nobody wants to give way. I think the church hierarchy should stay out of politics, particularly while we have such opposition, and the opposition has to be removed in as firm but understanding way as possible. There's no easy way to do it, and what you see happening on our little island will also be your problem tomorrow.
That is quite a conservative agenda. But I am not the only one concerned about it.
