Glynsky’s blinders

Dear Reader,

In his comment here, Glynsky showed his blinders. Shall we lift them a bit?

1. What a load of bollocks couched in pomposity. How do you find them in the first place to lock them up ?

“Them” refers to terrorists. Glynsky seems to think, one can find find them, before they commit a crime. Either he believes in mind readers, or – worse – he wants to make thinking and speaking a crime.

The obsession with “preventing crime”, proven to not work by the way, just takes the eyes off the ball. Which in this case would be, to catch criminals, prosecute them, and – if found guilty – punish them. No, let’s instead chase the bogeyman and build a surveillance state. It did work so well for the communist states, didn’t it?

2. If all these Government Departments and politicians (most of whom you lambast for not understanding the internet) don”t do their (albeit sometimes misguided) best to sort some sort of safety for all are there any other takers?

Safety from what? At what price?

You English lived through hundreds of real IRA terror attacks. Did you bomb Ireland in response? No. Did you lock up all Irish? No? Was everyone Irish under surveillance? No. Why? Because that would have been unreasonable, unjustified, out of proportion, etc. Yet today, all it takes is one incident, and you, your politicians, and media go crazy. And you are willing to give up the few freedoms you have, for what can only be called the illusion of security.

By the way, France had full telecommunications data retention since 2006. That worked well.

The supposed terrorists were on various French and international spy agency watch lists. Luckily that prevented the slaughter.

But don’t let mere facts get in the way of stupidity. After we lost direction, we doubled the effort.

3. Does it not occur to you that most (including you) properly civilised/cultured people can’t even glimpse at what drives them let alone understand and react to it in a way you find acceptable.

Nobody has a problem with catching, prosecuting, judging and punishing criminals. And in that order, please. But this is not, what the hysteria around Charlie Hebdo is about.

4. Magna Carter? Isn’t that ours (and the empires)? And you keep saying we have no constitution but quote MC when it suits.
I await with interest your detailed solution/s.

Magna Carta is one, just one, milestone. And no, it is not a constitution or a substitute for one, Glynsky.

Magna Carta gave a few rights to the barons against the king. And to nobody else. Similar to how the Greek and Roman democracy was for those, who did not have to work to make a living. You had to be able to hang around the forum to participate. Slaves and working people were either by law of de facto excluded. Except for voting once in a while. Usually for the one candidate, who paid the most. No too different from today, I admit.

Anyone preferring safety over freedom, should consider moving to North Korea. I hear it has perfect safety.

Engine Room

PS: If you find irony or sarcasm in this post, congratulations.

11 Replies to “Glynsky’s blinders”

  1. I hate to say it, but there seems to be a lot of people who look like terrorists working on security at Heathrow terminal 5.

  2. So, ER, I am related to Peaky Blinders – I am honoured.
    Woteva irony etc there may be in your reply, a coupla comments:
    1. Lets drop the whole idea of prevention – medical, crime, terrorism etc. Grand. Your favourite (as with Pete) is also, who needs soldiers.
    Right, so I don’t try to stop anything. When inevitable shit happens, I have no one to investigate it, chase them or try them. Fine.
    Don’t try to prevent crime – OK, will immediately take all the locks off everything and invite anyone passing to help themselves.
    The only balls to be taken off are yours – reason has obviously already been lobotomised.
    ‘Communist states’ – this tripe leaves room for a million more comments/articles/views and this is probably not the place.
    2. So IRA loonies were ignored by all here were they? No comment.
    They at least tipped their hats at ‘civilisation’ and (in the main) gave warning of an incident.
    3. Seems to me the only one with a problem here is you – and the insane legal and prison tariff system to name but a few.
    4. MC is cool, a British first, innovative (possibly a little flawed but then ER wasn’t there to write it).
    Safety? How long a list do you need of safe places/countries? Is the US on this list – er, no. No wonder you love the place.

  3. Yesterday I flew from Kiev to Vienna. Despite Ukraine being at war, the security check was very quick, professional and polite.
    I was hoping to be stopped by the female Ukrainian Customs Officer, who was a stunning blonde in tight uniform. I might have dared to declare my love for her but probably would have replied ‘nothing’.
    Hai zhive vilna Ukraina !!!

  4. Lots of hot stuff here.
    Although I agree ER rants on rather, we have to look at the effect that these Muslim terrorist are having on our civil liberties.
    Binladen actually said that the West would react in this way and go up our own arses in reversing all the civilised laws and ideals we have created over the years. He said that their invasion would succeed because we want to be liberal and tollerant and insist on integrating ethnic minorities into our societies, when some of them just won’t / don’t want to ingegrate.
    The UK and Europe have already run into trouble and the US is in hot pursuit. What do we do if we can’t take some preventative measures, if we don’t say hey let’s stop things here a while! Can our MC prevail?

  5. The world is completely crazy.
    Saudi Arabia is building an enormously long wall to keep IS out.
    Didn’t they complain when Israel built such a wall to keep Palestinians out ?

Comments are closed.