Loose Talk of Treason

Loose talk about the possibility of putting a number of Islamist radicals on trial for treason because of their approval of terrorist attacks has no practical relevance.

Its only value is to right-wing newspaper moguls obsessed with boosting circulation figures or to equally right-wing new Labour ministers who are desperate to create an impression of “tough” action to defeat terrorism.

To revive treason trials – the last such was in 1945 – specifically to deal with three people whose cases have been discussed by Attorney General Lord Goldsmith and Director of Public Prosecutions Ken Macdonald would be a retrograde step.

It would elevate this publicity-seeking trio to the level of martyrs in the eyes of some impressionable people and the case would also be likely to fail.

The willingness of some sections of the right-wing press to follow the treason steer given to them by Downing Street arises from the Prime Minister’s previous threats to democratic rights in Britain in light of last month’s terrorist atrocities in London.

Tony Blair was too preoccupied with denying the blatantly obvious fact that there was a link between the London bombings and his government’s policies in Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine to question why the security services were utterly in the dark about the planned attacks and the group behind them.

He has been prepared to throw unlimited funds at Britain’s domestic spying agencies, but, apart from regular warnings that London was a target – which every schoolchild must have known – there was no inkling of what lay in store for rush-hour public transport users.

What is the use of Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair and top spook John Scarlett constantly demanding new powers if they can’t use those they already have properly?

And what is the use of the Prime Minister prattling on about how we all have to stand together to prevent terrorists from changing the way we live when, in the next breath, he proposes to do exactly that.

One of the defining features of of the way we live is the rule of law, backed up by a host of democratic rights, every single of one of which was achieved through centuries of popular struggles in the teeth of ruling-class hostility.

Mr Blair proposes to toss this aspect of the way we live aside so that he can affect a tough image as a poor substitute for failing in his responsibility to assure the security of Britain’s citizens by not stirring up hatred against this country as a result of his preoccupation with imperialist wars.

He talks of amending the Human Rights Act, even though this Act simply embodies the European Convention on Human Rights, which is guaranteed by the European Court of Human Rights, and such action would be futile.

He also threatens longer periods of internment without charge, criminalisation of what he calls terrorism anywhere in the world and expelling naturalised British citizens to countries that practise torture.

Forget the mirage of treason trials. The reality of government plans to further restrict democratic rights are scary enough and they must be stopped.

Full article from ukwatch via Morning star at:
 http://www.ukwatch.net/article/866

Neil
................................................................................