The Surveillance State Should Be Targeted on Cows 330

British citizens are now watched by Big Brother more closely than any other people in the world. All activity by British people on the web or on the phone is now monitored and stored. The British government employs more secret police – GCHQ, MI5, MI6 and SO15 – per head of population than Russia. Let me repeat that. The British have more secret police per head of population than Russia. British people are watched on closed circuit television more often than any other people in the world. Under the Prevent programme, “radicals” like me can only speak in universities under monitoring so intense and conditions so onerous that organisers give up, as I can personally witness.

The Prevent strategy provides for informants in every governmental institution who report any expressions of dissent. The UK has effective levels of surveillance – and a far higher volume of intelligence reports on their own citizens – than were ever achieved by the Stasi in Eastern Germany.

But of course, it is all “essential” to protect the citizens from the “threat” of Islamic terrorism, which is a fundamental threat to our existence, right?

So how big a threat is Islamic terrorism?

Since 2000, 57 people have been killed in the UK by Islamic terrorism.
Since 2000, 74 people have been killed in the UK by cattle.
So cows are actually a more potent threat to our personal society that terrorism.

Or more seriously – since 2000, 15,612 people have been murdered in the UK. Of whom only 57 were murdered by terrorists. You have in fact almost a 300 times greater chance of being murdered by someone else than by a terrorist. Indeed you have over 200 times a greater chance of being murdered by your partner, a family member or a close friend, than a terrorist.

The surveillance state has fundamentally changed society in response to a “threat” which is statistically miniscule.

It has greatly increased the power of the state, at a time when the state is both facilitating and protecting the greatest growth in wealth inequality in human history.

That is not a coincidence.

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

330 thoughts on “The Surveillance State Should Be Targeted on Cows

1 2 3
  • Tony_0pmoc

    I don’t actually mind CCTV. If they had CCTV when I was mugged and robbed in Athens in 2009, I probably wouldn’t have been mugged and robbed, and if I had, there would be a reasonable chance of the muggers being caught by the police…if in fact the police gave a shit…which quite obviously they didn’t. I haven’t been back to Greece since, and I know Athens is 100 times worse now.

    Otherwise, whilst I largely agree, I think your numbers on people killed in the UK by Islamic terrorism are a bit on the high side.

    The Internet works both ways. The evidence against criminals in Government and the Media is overwhelming. They may not have been prosecuted yet, but that does not mean they won’t be. Societies change. Hitler is no longer running Germany.


    • glenn_uk

      Trouble is, Tony, CCTV only works _for_ the state. Never against its’ interests. Remember that newspaper seller Ian Tomlinson, who got murdered by that thug copper back in 2009? There was plenty of CCTV for that! Every one of the G20 protesters doubtless got their own mug-shot put into their file from that day.

      But when it came to evidence against the thug pig, nothing was to be found. Nah, in any case, he had attacked the cop. It was a protester who set about him, and caused his injuries leading to his death, the police were trying to protect him from a mob!

      It was only when some Aussie tourist’s camera footage was aired, that the truth came out.

      CCTV isn’t a two way street, mate.

  • fedup

    It has greatly increased the power of the state, at a time when the state is both facilitating and protecting the greatest growth in wealth inequality in human history.

    Very true indeed as the ranks of the hungry, destitute, penniless, and jobless without any means of state support grow thicker and faster than ever before. Proportional to this rise is the growth in the internal surveillance measures that are being put to use in UK. The hitherto unbelievable levels of censorship are covering up the degrees of intrusion of the state and the corporates into the lives of the ordinary citizens.

    The latest kabuki is about the “international plot” that is now being addressed here by apprehending people whom were in possession of “Unknown Substance of Interest” (vinegar tubs are indeed USI probably). That is while the filthy rich get filthier rich and the standard issue citizen is getting poorer at the same fast rate.

    Indeed it is not a coincidence.

    PS cows have more sense and they won’t tolerate the levels of intrusion into their lives and probably chase the spooks away.

    PPS we now have 764 internal espionage agencies and as you put it, “prevent” has come to make sure the vacuous gamer generation is living in the cyber world far removed from the real world.

  • Alan

    Craig, as a lowly electrical engineering apprentice, in what is now Milton Keynes, apart from the fact we learnt all about Bletchley Park, Colossus, and how Tommy Flowers built it for Alan Turing from our teachers who worked with him, one day we were taken on a trip to Rugby Radio Station, which, if you know anything about the plans for WW2, might mean a lot, but I’m not elaborating any further; you either know or you don’t know.

    “Listen to this!”, says the guy, handing us a pair of headphones.

    “It’s Radio Caroline.” we all answered.

    “Yes! We monitor it 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, in case they say something subversive!”

    Yea right! Tell me again what a free country we live in. The surveillance state is right on the buttton.

  • Habbabkuk (flush out fakes)

    I should be happy to read in a little more detail exactly how the “surveillance state” has “greatly increased the power of the state”.

    Any thoughts should, inter alia, address the following aspects:

    1/. how has the power of the state been increased with practical effect (practical examples)

    2/. and any practical examples brought forward should be looked at in terms of whether they are harmful to the well-being and rights of the citizen or the contrary.

    • bevin

      If you posted less and thought, or even read, more, you would be likely to ask fewer silly questions.
      Try asking yourself where the adage “knowledge is power” came from. And why it was thought to be so.

      • Habbabkuk (flush out fakes)

        Was that meant to be a magisterial put-down, Bevin?

        You have to put aside these idealistic thoughts and think practically. How is the knowledge – for example – that I, Habbabkuk, was walking along Cheltenham High Street last Friday afternoon constitute or represent “power”? And whose “power”?

    • Alan

      It hasn’t! They must now be suffering the same problems that the Stazi discovered. i.e. If you can’t trust anybody, who can you believe?

      Ain’t paranoia a bitch? ROFL

    • Republicofscotland

      “1/. how has the power of the state been increased with practical effect (practical examples)”

      “2/. and any practical examples brought forward should be looked at in terms of whether they are harmful to the well-being and rights of the citizen or the contrary.”



      You have obviously thought your questions through so it seem only polite and proper to try answer them.

      Well the practical effect is the state in now privy to far more information, with regards to the public, via communications and surveillance.

      GCHQ all ready apply the full take regarding online data collection, I hear you say not so, but, just about every search engine providers complies with the rules.

      Holding data for everyone in the UK, ie, browsing history etc, could lead to that data being rolled out at a later date and used to compromise, smear, someone or a group who, have negative information, that could compromise political dirty secrets. That is a example of how less privacy can lead to, damaging the publics interests.



      As for surveillance, Britain is already a country with more cctv camera’s per-head of population than just about anywhere else in the world. Now I’m not saying that’s a bad thing in itself, it does help fight crime and catch criminals.

      But it can also be used to place someone, in a certain area at a certain time, which could be used, to link them to anything that occurs in that area, the camera’s can also be used to follow, or spy on anyone, the state deems fit to do so, without public consent, whether there’s cause to do so or not.

  • John MacKinnon

    The “surveillance state” is not aimed at you or me as currently incarnated, Craig. It’s aimed at all of us, but later – in 20 years or so there is a strong probablity that there will be major food, water and other and primary resource shortages, combined with other effects of global warming such as rising sea levels and population movements. That’s what it’s all about – managing future mass population movements, starvation and massive popular revolution. I don’t think they will win out in the long run, but in the short they will do a lot of damage.

      • Alan

        Why Habbabkuk, I would swear you are in a panic. I’m so glad to know that in 20 years, if I’m not out of this mess and brown bread, I’m gonna be so surprised. Hey, life was reasonably good up until Tony Blair. You have my utmost sympathy.

  • Habbabkuk (flush out fakes)

    To illustrate, taking the example of CCTV and Fedup.

    Fedup, while walking around town muttering wildly, is recorded on, say, 10 CCTV cameras. The existence of those 10 cameras, however, do not have the practical effect of preventing Fedup from walking about muttering away. Furthermore, unless Fedup is already known to the police (and they have his mugshot (poor them!), all which the watcher of those 10 cameras – and indeed anyone else who might see the film subsequently – will know is that there is/was someone walking around muttering away.

    On the other hand, let us suppose that a casual passer by is distressed by Fedup’s mutterings and would like to clock him. There, the presence of CCTV cameras might well deter him – or, if they do not, they might just conceivablyincrease the chances of Fedup’s assailant being apprehended subsequently.

    • Loony

      Could there be a reason why you choose not to illustrate the example of CCTV with an example more grounded in the real world?

      Take for example the atrocity of the London tube and bus bombings. Images of the perpetrators of this act were repeatedly captured on CCTV and yet CCTV neither deterred them from their actions nor enabled the security services to prevent their actions.

      • Habbabkuk (flush out fakes)

        Obviously CCTV by itself is not THE solution for preventing terrorist attacks but you cannot say categorically that they would never (of have never been) be of assistance; they are only one of a panoply of measures; furthermore you should in any case not generalise from their failure to prevent the London bombings. Lastly, you will know that CCTV preceded the recent outbreak of terrorist activity and it is said that they have been and are useful weapons against crime in general (again, without being THE solution).

        I note that you have not told me exactly how the use of CCTV has negative practical effects on people. If you like : where and what is the practical harm?

        • Loony

          It is the case that no-one can categorically say that CCTV has not and will never be of assistance in preventing terrorism – just like no-one can categorically prove that eating cucumber has not and will never be of assistance in preventing terrorism.

          However it seems likely that terrorists are undeterred by CCTV, and may be positively inspired by the presence of other recording media. I recall CCTV images of the recent Belgian terrorists, I believe that the murderers of Lee Rigby were keen that their actions be filmed and the infamous “Jihadi John” appeared in media both regularly and voluntarily.

          CCTV erodes privacy, however privacy is being eroded on a number of fronts and perhaps today people are less concerned with privacy than in the past. I do not know. If CCTV is harmful then the harm would lie in engendering in people a false sense of security.

          You argue that it assists in preventing terrorism, I think it likely has no effect. If I am correct then CCTV is contributing to your false sense of security. How harmful is that? I don’t know.

        • glenn_uk

          “I note that you have not told me exactly how the use of CCTV has negative practical effects on people. If you like : where and what is the practical harm?

          It has a chilling effect on our free speech, which is essential for democracy. I personally know people who would like to take part in protests, but fear for their jobs, what their employers (current of future) might think, and whether that would make the police more likely to target them.

          They end up not attending protests/rallies and so forth. Democracy is damaged, free speech chilled. Job done.

        • Yossi

          The use of CCTV is used, among other devices, to induce a star of fear and state authority over possible dissenters. As a ‘citizen’ I find this objectionable and dangerous, but I understand that ‘subjects’ might find it warm and cosy.

        • Jim

          I’m with Loony and Glen UK on this one Habby. Couldn’t stop myself from getting sucked in again!

    • Republicofscotland


      Your above comment, focuses inward on, the practical uses of cctv, as I stated in my comment to you, at 21.34pm regarding your 19.27pm comment, it’s the “bigger picture” (no pun intended) that allows room for abuse.

      Like I stated at 21.34pm, cctv, does catch criminals or strange, or suspicious behaviour, however as also stated in my 21.34pm comment, cctv can be used to follow snoop or spy on a individual or groups, for whatever cause, and for whatever reason, such at to implicate or smear.

  • RobG

    In the aftermath of last November’s ‘terror attacks’ in Paris, David Cameron made a quite chilling statement in Parliament:

    “Thirdly, to defeat this terrorist threat in the long run we must also understand and address its root cause. That means confronting the poisonous ideology of Islamist extremism itself. As I have argued before, that means going after both violent and non-violent extremists — those who sow the poison but stop short of actually promoting violence; they are part of the problem.”

    Going after “non-violent extremists” means going after anyone who disagrees with the government.

    More UK laws have been passed in the last 10 years than in the last 200 years, and most of them reduce hard won civil liberties.

    • Habbabkuk (flush out fakes)


      “Going after “non-violent extremists” means going after anyone who disagrees with the government.”

      That is nonsense, and you know it.

      In the case of Islamic terrorism, for example, it means going after those who encourage young Moslems to go off to Syria or Irak to join IS. Or after Imams in the UK who praise martyrhood by means of blowing yourself and others to Kingdom come.

        • Habbabkuk (flush out fakes)

          I should prefer it, RobG if you were to summarise the arguments in your link rather than just presenting the link. It would be courteous on your part and, more importantly, demonstrate that you are prepared to take a little time and trouble to make your point.

          Re your last sentence : are you not “propagandising the public” as well by posting here? Unless; of course, you consder the readers of this blog to be a little club and not the public.

        • lysias

          The snitch can’t be bothered to take the time to follow and read your link.

          If he did that, he would have less time to post more comments.

      • Loony

        Why is it nonsense to suggest that going after non violent extremists means going after anyone who disagrees with the government?

        You surely do not believe that the cult of no-platforming, micro aggression, hate speech, safe spaces, trans-phobia etc are the genuine manifestations of an intelligent and mature population.

  • Anon1

    “Since 2000, 57 people have been killed in the UK by Islamic terrorism.
    Since 2000, 74 people have been killed in the UK by cattle. ”

    It sounds like the security services are doing a good job, then. You don’t mention the number of attacks prevented. Perhaps you could estimate the number of casualties that would have occurred had those attacks gone ahead? Then put that along side your cow figure.

    Outside the UK, the level of protection afforded to citizens makes them much more vulnerable to attacks by Islamic fanatics. Hence the daily death toll in Islamic countries is staggeringly high. They do not possess the same technology and intelligence gathering abilities as does this country.

    “So cows are actually a more potent threat to our personal society that terrorism.”

    This is false. More people are killed by cows because of the very large number of terrorist plots foiled by the security services. Just yesterday we had some fanatical Muslims arrested at three UK airports on suspicion of terrorist offences. What enables you to make your false comparison is the exact same thing you oppose – heightened security.

    My reaction to your blog and the revelation that more people are killed by cows than terrorists, is to give a big thumbs up to the UK security services. ???

    • Habbabkuk (flush out fakes)

      Seconded, Anon1.


      I will lay odds that there will not be a single serious attempt to reply to the points I made at 19h24 and 19h35 above.

      • Anon1

        I just won a packet on the Scotch National and I’m not going to throw it away on that 🙂

      • glenn_uk

        H: “I will lay odds that there will not be a single serious attempt to reply to the points I made at 19h24 and 19h35 above.

        I trust you only bet for the fun of it, Habbabkuk? It would be a highly unprofitable pastime for you otherwise 😉

      • Alan

        At 19h24 and 19h35 on a Saturday evening you were posting here? What an exciting life you lead Habbabkuk. I trust you were also wearing your tinfoil helmet so none of us can beam sinister thoughts into your brain.

    • RobG

      Anon1, the security services haven’t been doing a good job with regard to the ‘cattle terrorism’.

      Maybe the spooks should start listening to The Archers more often.

    • Loony

      Your argument is not persuasive as it cannot be absent some informed estimate of the number of casualties that would have occurred had terrorist attacks actually happened. So far as I am aware such an estimate is impossible to compute – since, among other things, you would need to make various assumptions regarding the “perfect execution” of events that have never happened.

      Even if such an estimate could be derived and be capable of widespread acceptance as being reasonable, you are faced with further problems. For example how many of these attacks were inspired by UK foreign policy – most of which, as it relates to inflicting violence in foreign lands, is entirely elective.

      There are issues with your implication that the UK affords a high level of protection to its citizens. With regard to the narrow sphere with which you appear concerned your assertion may be correct. On a broader level it would be interesting to know how the UK affords protection to its citizens by allowing an unknown number of “refugees” with unknown backgrounds and unknown ideologies to enter the country.

      For a state so concerned with the security of its citizens is it not remarkable that it puts no pressure on Saudi Arabia to offer sanctuary to its co-religionists but instead permits ongoing Saudi funding for mosques and madrassas inside the UK. With all of its vaunted intelligence gathering capabilities how is it that the UK appears largely uninformed as to exactly what messages may be imparted in these institutions.

      • Habbabkuk (flush out fakes)

        That (ie the cause of actual or prevented terrorist attacks) is entirely irrelevant to the question of estimates, surely.

        • Loony

          No it is entirely relevant since if the elective actions of the UK caused terrorist plots to be formulated then an alternative would exist to the security services thwarting those plots. That alternative would have been not to engage in the elective actions that caused the plots to be initiated. In such circumstances there would be nothing to thwart.

          • lysias

            Which would have been no use to the people employed by the bureaucracies in question, nor to the plutocrats whom those bureaucrats serve.

      • Anon1

        You can make a low-end estimate if you like. The fact remains that dozens of terrorist plots have been foiled that had they taken place would put the UK on an “Advise against all travel” list.

        As things are, and thanks to the hard work of our security services, more people are trampled to death by cows than killed by terrorists. ?

        I agree on the migrant crisis.

        Re Saudi Arabia, the alternative in that part of he world is far worse even than the House of Saud. It isn’t widely understood that the Sauds play off the more (yes, even more) fanatical religious elements in return for their support. Hence the obscene and decadent lifestyles of the elite who are just jumped up donkey dealers, managing to co-exist with the fundamentalist tyrannical Islam promulgated by the clerics. Trust me, you wouldn’t want to see the other option.

        That’s the reality on the ground and it has to be dealt with, but granted it is easy for a halfwit like Fedup with no experience of dealing with this kind of situation to announce from the comfort of his bedsit that the UK supports Islamic terrorism .

        • Loony

          I do not know if the UK supports Islamic terrorism, but it certainly creates the conditions in which it can thrive. The examples of both Iraq and Libya serve to illustrate.

          Your analysis of the forces at work with regard to Saudi is correct. This then begs the question as to why the UK continues to tolerate funding for extremist institutions inside the UK. Surrendering to blackmail (if that is what is at play) is unlikely to be a strategy conducive to a successful outcome.

          Justifying Increased surveillance in the name of security basically equates to playing “security” as the trump card. Outside of the realm of internal security there is ample evidence that the UK government is playing fast and loose with regard to security, some of which is obliquely referred to above. The actions of the UK government in this regard are only possible by maintaining a distracted and ignorant population.

        • fedup

          Anon the racist tosser has such a high opinion of itself and its “master race”!!!

          The “jumped up donkey dealers” have just got back the two islands that have been occupied by the “master race” since the 1967 war. Out manoeuvred by a bunch of “jumped up donkey dealers” the zionist scrotes have quietly vanished and handed over the islands to Egypt that in turn will hand these over to the “jumped up donkey dealers”!!!

          This tosser then has the gall to go on record; “Fedup with no experience of dealing with this kind of situation to announce from the comfort of his bedsit that the UK supports Islamic terrorism”

          HAHAHAHAHA what a sad fuckwit this anon the racist tosser is? ROFL the “experienced one” pontificating has got me laughing my arse off here. I can’t type for laughing

          • Anon1

            Started early on the Frosty Jack’s? Try to pass out by 6pm then you won’t be hungover for your shelf stacking tomorrow. 😉

          • fedup

            You are such a rank tosser anon!!!!! You really have not the first clue, do you? Is this the best you have got?

            Projections, projections!!!!

            What a deluded wanker you are?

            Get on with your mental masturbation, don’t forget your comfort blanket now!

            ROFL I really cannot type for laughing, you are such a pitiful tosser anon!!

        • Republicofscotland

          “You can make a low-end estimate if you like. The fact remains that dozens of terrorist plots have been foiled that had they taken place would put the UK on an “Advise against all travel” list.”



          I see you question Craigs figures, with no evidence produced as a counterweight. Yet you go on and say exactly the same thing in your above comment.

          I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt, by asking you to provide proof of “Dozens of Terrorist Plots Foiled.”

          Links to documentation from GCHQ or MI5/6 or Ministerial documents, would be most appreciated, however Fourth Estate propaganda will be treated with disdain.

          Thank you in advance. ?

    • D-Majestic

      Heaven help us-do you really believe the bullcrap you write? How about they start investigating the larger number of people killed by falling chest-freezers?

    • Esclavo

      April 16, 2016 at 19:45

      You don’t mention the number of attacks prevented.


      Spy chiefs public hearing: Security services have ‘foiled 34 terror plots’ in UK since 7/7

      Since the July 7 attacks in London in 2005, there have been 34 plots disrupted in the UK, some of which were “aimed at mass casualties” and the majority of which were thwarted by the actions of the intelligence and security agencies, he said.



      Two convicted over moped drive-by London terror plot

      Two university students have been convicted of wanting to kill on London’s streets in the name of Islamic State in what counter-terrorism officials believe was the most significant jihadi plot targeting Britain in a decade.

    • glenn_uk

      Because something isn’t happening, a solid conclusion may be drawn, you are saying? That is known as a specious argument. I ought to charge you for keeping my lamp on upstairs – after all, it’s kept your house free from marauding lions all these years, has it not?

      The number of attacks prevented can be judged by the number of criminals convicted, with solid evidence of serious preparation for an attack. Not many of those, are there? You think the authorities have a 99.99% success rate or something – would you like to put a figure on it? – because they certainly don’t prevent any other crime with such odds.

      Outside the UK – say New Zealand – how many threats and deaths are there there for terrorism? Perhaps invading and occupying these Islamic states, installing stooges, undermining their economies, corrupting their governments, or cosying up to filthy dictators while it suits us is possibly conducive to terrorism as a backlash, wouldn’t you say?

      Of course you know all this, you’ve been loitering on this blog long enough to have had the truth explained to you scores of times.

      • fred

        “That is known as a specious argument.”

        But to be fair no more so than arguing that cows are a more potent threat to our personal society than terrorism based merely on the number of fatalities.

      • Anon1

        I know you think we deserve these attacks, Glenn. I get that. Gunning tourists down on a beach in Tunisia. Blowing up a bus or train full commuters. Opening fire into a crowded rock concert. It’s what you do when you’re pissed off about the Iraq War.

        I just don’t know how Belgium fits into your justification for Islamic extremism, or the constant stream of head-choppings, suicide bombings and other such acts of barbarity which are reported from around the world on a daily basis, to such an extent that we are barely moved by them any more. It’s nowt to do with Islam, though, is it, Glenn. Can’t have that.

        Yes I’ve been here long enough to know that you must find a way of blaming ourselves for all these things, Glenn. Excusing Islamic fascism by any means possible is what you do. You’re on the left! 😉

        • glenn_uk

          You’re an idiot, Anon1. You probably think the weather forecaster is “justifying” whatever conditions are being predicted.

          Perhaps an oncologist is “justifying” cancer, a historian “justifies” everything that’s ever taken place, and so on, in your silly little finger-pointing world?

          • Anon1

            Those would be impartial observations, Glenn. In common with many on the left, your gut instinct when faced with the reality of Islamic extremism/fascism is to make excuses for it or blame it on ourselves (although to your credit you haven’t engaged in conspiracy theories as another means of denial).

    • Ba'al Zevul

      Have I ever told you about the total success of my deployment of elephant traps in Orkney? Not an elephant to be seen. Result.

    • Habbabkuk (flush out fakes)

      The usual dark mutterings of “they”, and “people” and “fed up” without the slightest attempt to qualify, quantify or expound.

      It’s just silly.

      • Itsy

        Either you are just being irritating by constantly asking for further information, Habbab, or you genuinely don’t understand because your skull is full of grape seeds, not brain cells.
        Ba’al Zevul’s remarks about Orkney and elephants was classic.

  • RobG

    By the way, can anyone explain to me exactly why we have MI5, MI6, et al? They are a constant drain on the tax payer’s purse (vastly greater than ‘Benefit Street’) and only exist to serve the 1%.

    Mind you, it’s the same British mentality with the royal family.

    Tug your forelocks and bow.

  • Anon1

    Take the September 11th attacks for example. 3,000 killed and 6,000 injured in one morning. I doubt so many people were trampled by cows on that day.

    That there has been no attack as large-scale as that – though there have been many attacks on a smaller scale too numerous to name, most recently the slaughter in Brussels – is largely thanks to the efforts of Western security agencies and their foiling of many hundreds of plots by Islamic fanatics to reap death and destruction indiscriminately on civilian populations. Sadly, the same cannot be said of Islamic countries, where terrorist beheadings, crucifixions, mass-rapes and suicide bombings are the order of the day.

  • Manda

    “The British government employs more secret police – GCHQ, MI5, MI6 and SO15 – per head of population than Russia.”

    I have to laugh reading the corporate media in the UK… ‘the Russians are coming’ again! Actually, Putin all by himself will be able to pull it off. So bizarre, the strange world they try to create for us.

    “The surveillance state has fundamentally changed society in response to a “threat” which is statistically miniscule.”

    The threat to the UK state/elites IS the citizens… waking up from the long indoctrinated slumber and having thoughts and ideas ‘above their station’….

    Those that don’t object to their privacy being invaded might find this discussion interesting.

    • Habbabkuk (flush out fakes)

      Your post gives me the opportunity to remind you and readers that the British secret services exist to counter a variety of unfriendly, harmful activities directed against the UK , not only Islamic terrorism. It is no secret, for example, that the fall of Communism has not led to any appreciable decrease in Russian military, economic and industrial espionage in the West.

      • Alan

        “the British secret services exist to counter a variety of unfriendly, harmful activities directed against the UK””

        Wrong! The British secret services exist to counter any threats, real or imagined, against the monarch of the UK.

        When are you going to start living in the real world?

        • fedup

          This specimen has papers to absolve it from living in the real world! It used to inform us all of it’s attendance in thé dansant!!!! Careful if you fall off your diaphanous, I nearly hurt my back when I fell off mine!!! That is the strain of specimen that we are addressing here.

  • Mark Golding

    Craig says, “It has greatly increased the power of the state, at a time when the state is both facilitating and protecting the greatest growth in wealth inequality in human history.

    One would hope only fools and cretins would make light of that statement. Seriously it is evident with ‘Prevent’ and other strategies such as ‘the interception of communications, equipment interference and the acquisition and retention of communications’ that the British state is pursuing an expansion of its power and influence.

    A cunning plan indeed by the British ‘establishment’ to confuse, frighten, intimidate and discourage; to further Britain’s long lost cohesiveness and understanding especially of different ethnic groups – Yes that’s right we have forfeited some of the core principles in any true democratic society since the July 7th 2005 ‘ inconsistencies’ that forced former Home Secretary (now an ‘establishment’ Baron) John Reid, to apologize for the train time error in parliament, blaming erroneous first-hand witness accounts.

    Baron Reid (G4S) is, in my universe, the dark guardian of public safety, the force behind the 2006 ‘liquid’ Data Communications Bill – recall Lee Rigby, Chertoff Group, Cassidian cyber-security and Ultra electronics data recording, analysis, surveillance and more.

    Baron Reid – the man who secretly planned the misconceived British invasion of Helmand with untold slaughter of Afghans as well as some hundreds of British would kill me, Mr Golding for less. Nevertheless he, my friends, is the man who will stop Mr Corbyn from power (but I did not tell you that).

  • Hannigan wanks to your pubescent daughters' selfies

    Well then you’ll just have to settle for the boot on your face forever

    • Mark Golding

      Go home – it’s all hopeless, impossible, since integrity is rising – and FFS close the door and turn off the lights else the Department of Energy will send another icky letter.

      • fedup

        Who the hell is Hannigan?

        Is this a play on the Turkish Sultan and his oh so thin skin? He gets so offended if the rose petals aren’t pressed and cologned properly to be thrown at hi feet as he surveys the sultanate.

        Department of Energy? Mark it is now a utility company don’t forget and they can cut the offenders off with their smart meters all by accident and mistake of course. Today the “sanction” the sick, infirm and the unemployed, tomorrow it will the the turn of those loud mouths that the resident self confessed snitch has reported them to the relevant sis inside and for good measures from without and outside too. Just in case as any diligent snitch would do.

    • fedup

      Until it is Buwwwaaahhhh any minute now your balls will drop off level is reached stay cool!!!!

      Cool running!

      Liked your scale though terrifically terribly terrifyingly really really real threat levels

  • Tony_0pmoc

    Sometimes, some people literally can’t stand it any more…and they plan it for quite awhile…but then they see a chance…before they are too old… and they just jump – before they are pushed without a parachute..

    My Sis is a bit like that…now.. She has Resigned. She will no longer be working for The Government.

    but I want you to see this if I can find it..cos my wife has done it twice..but not quite like this….

    Who Says Americans Suck?…I know they did it live. I could just feel it when nothing much happens for a minute or two..and you gradually realise…

    “NYC Freedom Tower B.A.S.E. Jump”


  • John Goss

    Who but a spook, spook-groupie, bigot or troll would support our (unanswerable to anybody) secret services? Scroll down the page and categorise. Post me the results. Thanks.

  • lysias

    Why should we be worried about Russian espionage, now that Russia is no longer Communist, and indeed is more Christian these days than the countries of the West?

    • John Goss

      I know a lot of people believe that the old Soviet Union was anti-Christian. How then could I worship openly in 1982 in Moscow? Putin’s father was a communist and did not believe in God, which is fine, but his mother did. She secretly took Vladimir to be christened and he is still a regular churchgoer, which is also fine. He very often seeks out small rural orthodox churches to spring a surprise visit on from what I understand.

      • Resident Dissident

        So one foreign Leninist (remember who started the Gulags) being allowed to worship in a church with probably KGB observers in attendance proves that the Soviet Union was not anti Christian – and Solzhenitsyn and all the persecuted Christians can just be ignored. Why do you think Putin’s mother took her son to be SECRETLY christened, if the Soviet State was not anti Christian ?????????

        Any way we can now use the same argument to demonstrate that the British State is not anti free speech, Leninists etc etc etc – because Mr Goss is allowed to freely express his views in this public place.

          • Resident Dissident

            That is what happens when you restrict the number – similarly there are only 6 mosques in Moscow for 1.5 million Muslims, so that they are also packed and there is still persecution on non Orthodox Christianity.

  • Roderick Russell

    Re Craig’s comment – “The surveillance state has fundamentally changed society”.

    The surveillance state is about control; it is about subverting the democracy from within. It has changed society from being more or less a democracy into that very dangerous thing – a totalitarian state disguised as a democracy. Continuous snooping means that these secret police agencies (MI5, MI6, QCHQ, etc.) end up knowing everybody’s secrets, and this information can be used to control us – MPs, Ministers, Judges, Journalists, or those who appoint them. Literally anybody of political influence.

    There are very few people (and even fewer politicians) who don’t have some cobweb in their closet that they can be blackmailed on. And if blackmail isn’t sufficient, then, as I write about, they can be subjected to as Stasi-style persecution designed, in the words of GCHQ, to to achieve “Physiological”, “Cognitive” and “Affective Stress” in their target victims using methods designed, again in GCHQ’s own words, to “Disrupt”, Destroy”, “Diffuse” and “Discredit” their victims.

    Yes, the Spy agencies have fundamentally changed society. They have taken our democracy away from us.

    • Tony_0pmoc

      Roderick Russell,

      I remember reading what you wrote several years ago..and I believed it…cos you are still writing here now..

      Are you All Right Mate?

      They are not still giving you a hard time are they you ?? Even Craig Murray has admitted to kind of going into hiding for a bit…The most extreme thing I ever did…and it was a very hot summer..well I did not have any clothes on…and I was playing football outside my house completely naked in 1985 with my empty beer barrel.

      No one even noticed. No one called the police or anything. Absolutely nothing happened.

      It was hot.

      But I expected some kind of reaction.

      And I got NOTHING

      No one gives a sh1t.

      So I thought Fck it..and After 6 months off..I went Back To Work.

      they were so nice to me…they thought i had a bit of a nervous breakdown

      too much responsibility too young

      they took me back..and I was really really bad



  • Ruth

    The UK needs this level of surveillance for two reasons. The first is to counter rebellion. The second and probably the most important is to keep the criminal activities of the state/Establishment under wraps. These activities are vast and beyond the belief of most citizens.

    • Mark Golding

      These ‘criminal activities’ Ruth are mostly a cabal of ‘zombies’ who have ‘crossed’ a line between life and death. It is possible to go back but it could take a billion years in human terms. Personally I would not want to squander that amount of time and that huge amount of energy to convert and transform back to matter.

  • Ben Monad

    Witness; The Making of a Radical. The realization arrives like plus tides after many a lapping on the shore.

    It only takes sincere participation in the process to elicit the transformation. Frustration motivates.

  • pabelmont

    Cows are contributing — doing their part ! — to increase greenhouse gases and “bring on” global warming. Of course, people do a lot more, and all of this is a sort of “terrorism” in the sense that it is bringing closer a dreadful climate change which may kill far more people and otgher living things than ever Hitler did in the ever-so-famous holocaust.

    Of course, climate change is coming on slowly, like the bullet fired from a high-powered rifle would do if fired through molasses, and we uwsually refuse to grant the distinguished moniker of “terrorism” to any “bullet” that is so slow that it takes many years to reach its target.

    But — citizens of UK and elsewhere ! — beware of cows (and of yourselves) — global warming is far more threatening than terrorism.

  • CanSpeccy

    It has greatly increased the power of the state, at a time when the state is both facilitating and protecting the greatest growth in wealth inequality in human history.

    The greatly increased power of the state has occurred at a time when the state is committed to the genocide of its own people as a racial and cultural entity, the goal to be achieved by suppression of the fertility of the indigenous population combined with mass immigration and multiculturalism, for the purpose of destroying the sovereign, democratic nation state to make way for a New World (global) Order.

    I think that, more than increased inequality of wealth, is what the elite most fear could set off a dangerous revolt, for even if disparities of wealth are unprecedented, so also is the standard of living of the great majority of the people, many of who seem to think that at least two foreign holidays a year is a necessity of life, together with two cars per family and a greater supply of food and alcohol than the populace has ever “enjoyed” before.

    • ue

      Tocqueville argued that revolutions occur when a period of improving conditions for the masses is followed by a period of privation.

  • Silvio

    Nothing like a good “two fer one” deal to get a shopper motivated to pull out the credit card and spend, spend, spend like there is no tomorrow. USA directly and/or indirectly funds and supports the ISIS terrorists, ostensibly only in order to overthrow evil dictator of the day Assad, but at the same time it doesn’t really give a sh!t if some of the same terrorists filter back into Europe to create some Operation Gladio and Strategy of Tension type terroristic mayhem in its NATO allies’ backyards. If it is desirable to have the populace turn to the state to ask for greater security and to willingly give up their civil rights for greater safety and protection, some random acts of terrorism can be good motivators.

    “You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple: to force the public to turn to the state to ask for greater security.” Convicted and jailed Gladio terrorist Vincenzo Vinciguerra:

    The West’s Terrorist “Catch and Release” Program
    By Tony Cartalucci

    For fisheries around the world, the concept of “catch and release” allows anglers to enjoy the fishing experience while preserving the numbers and health of fish populations. The concept of “catch and release” for Western security and intelligence agencies appears very similar – to maintain the illusion of counterterrorism operations, while maintaining the numbers and health of terrorist organizations around the world.

    Answering “to what end” the West is allowing terrorists to successfully carry out attacks against Western targets, the answer is quite simple. It allows for the expansion of power and control at home while justifying endless and profitable wars abroad.

    The creation and perpetuation of terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda and ISIS by the West and its allies serve another, admitted purpose. In the 1980′s it was admitted that Al Qaeda was created to wage proxy war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. In 2011, the US and its NATO and Persian Gulf allies used terrorists linked to Al Qaeda in Libya and Syria in an attempt to overthrow their respective governments.

    Today, ISIS serves both as an armed proxy waging full-scale war on the governments of Syria, Iraq, and more indirectly Iran and Russia, as well as a means to threaten and coerce nations around the world.

1 2 3

Comments are closed.