/** Tools */

26 March 2009

No Fifth amendment, "No Comment."

Still think Orwellian, Big Brother style, police state fascism isn't in operation? Open your eyes.

You may not have the right to silence, but you certainly have the right to "No comment." Lessons in why from America via Professor James Duane.

6 comments:

lwtc247 said...

and when that right is exercised we'll fing sack you.

G20 protest professor suspended
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7967096.stm

(unless or course your verbalisations supported the apple-cart that is)

Britain sucks!

lwtc247 said...

ummmm feel I should say: I'm not missing the point Ant, it's just that I'm saying they'll shaft you which ever way.

But w.r.t. things Mirnda, hasn't it been changed to 'it may harm your defense if you don't answer' already? [read: "We will take your silence to mean your guilty. That is, it's the line we'll adopt until such time when you've been in solitary for year, had your time consuming appearance in court at the cost of £millions only for them to find out (if your lucky) that we've been talking out of our bottoms - oh btw, you're life is ruinied now anyway so you may as well stay in Belmsrsh anyway - F u buddy!"]

I watched the video last week. It's good 'n gives well laid out reasons WHY such a law is needed plus how bent lawyers and cops can 'stuff you' and CO19 style 'snuff you', even if you are innocent.

Not that you really need bent cops in the UK anyway (made redundant largely by incompetitat and expedient judges). Still, if you are wrongly conviced, you've got you nestegg of £46 to look froward on release (rate of £1.70 for a year of your life).

The cop talking at then end seemed pretty reasonable however, but obviously was wise enough to bend the system in his favour.

But, Lordy how bad things have become. Even the pretence of being a vallient country his gone way past the u-bend.

Bridget said...

@ ltwc7 Aren't we all just thinking and feeling the same thing? Mass consciousness?

The Antagonist said...

Thanks Bridget! Inspirational as ever.

The Antagonist said...

@lwtc247 - In fairness, that professor is a bit of a loon, but not the useful sort. Rather he's more of a useful idiot - useful to the powers that be, that is.

He favours what he calls Mutually Assured Destruction which I'm not sure qualifies as any sort of sane demand on any level.

MAD by name, MAD by nature.

Smashing shit up has always had limited political value and is usually over just as quickly as it starts. If anything, smashing shit up acts as the catalyst for, and justification of, even more repression.

The State -- as Max Weber noted -- holds the monopoly on the legitimate use of violence. That's how it maintains itself and why it maintains standing bodies of armed men, ready to be deployed to manifest that violence on command.

What's required by the greater mass of humanity is instead organisation and solidarity, and the seizing control of their means of production and property, in the collective interest of all.

The Antagonist said...

Journos go a bit Marxist:

The union should 'engage in the spirit of revolution' rather than looking at retraining journalists for work in PR, he added.

....

"The distribution model is broken beyond repair. If you are reliant on a bike to deliver your news product in 2009 you are in trouble. The means for distribution is in our hands; the means for production is in our hands."


Ho ho ho!