|BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU! which used to be a bad thing. UK's Home Office tries to put a friendly face on tyranny. Fascists regularly point to the alleged fact that no matter what pundits blather about liberty (and few pundits do in fact speak FOR liberty), the sheeple want Big Brother watching their every move, with more than five million security cameras watching people in the UK alone! But is it really true we are fine living in an Orwellian paradise—or do we just figure there's no point in complaining about it?|
Sthagati—“he covers or conceals”—A Sanskrit word, from which we get the English word “thug”.
Intercept and store.
Tyranny is Safety.
Arbeit Macht Frei.
Government as Thuglife.
Or—as the UK’s Home Office now encourages British citizens: have no fear to report “small things” people are doing that make a nation of frightened little rats and Chicken Littles suspicious:
“[S]mall things that seem out of place can be useful as part of a bigger investigation.”No doubt, small things like Muslims that have buzzed away from their Middle-Eastern hives, where they belong, and who are now nesting in London, where they are “out of place”.
As Scotland Yard says: TOTAL POLICING!
Or you know, “Strength through Unity. Unity through Faith.”
We might recall it was Chicken Little’s hysterical concern to report the small things (to the government) that led her and her little community of poultry right into Foxy Loxy’s supper pot.
Recently, of course, we had the Home Office police-thugs holding journalist Glenn Greenwald’s partner (i.e., life and journalism partner), David Miranda, in the hole at Heathrow. Police-thug justification for this was that they suspected Miranda was up to some kind of terrorist activity: specifically helping Greenwald practice effective journalism.
Nobody is saying Barack Obama called David Cameron and ordered the current PM-Poodle to put the screws to Miranda. Obviously, Obama is all for police thuggery, and putting the clamps down on journalists trying to work for the people. But the White House, acting all coy like Bashar al-Assad about that little sarin mass-murder, doesn’t want to own up to an active role in Cameron’s febrile fascism.
Whether it’s the outrageous spitting on the First Amendment that Obama and his Gestapo-FBI have perpetrated against American news organizations like AP, or the deeply disturbing data destruction forced upon the Guardian by its own British secret police, we know that V-time is here in earnest.
That is true even in the way that government-packaged “journalists” defend the most disgusting acts of tyranny as legal and necessary efforts to protect public safety.
For example, this:
“No one escapes their past. No one escapes judgement.”Or this:
"It’s clear David Miranda wasn’t stopped because he was Glenn Greenwald’s partner. He was stopped because he was suspected of carrying classified information highly detrimental to the UK national interest."Except, if that were true, then why did the Home Office release David Miranda? If the Home Office starts confiscating computers from people who just might be carrying information that is highly detrimental to the UK national interests (which interests must not include an informed citizenry), then pretty much any journalist or any number of collaborators of journalists might be accused of—of TERRORISM!
Think that's extreme?
Well, someone had better tell that to Theresa May, the Home Secretary, who had the Home Office issue a statement regarding the criticism over Miranda's detention that included a warning:
"Those who oppose [detaining Miranda] need to think about what they are condoning."
And the Home Office statement clarified the meaning: their detention of Miranda was part of their fight on terrorism—therefore, if you support Miranda's right to not be dragged off a plane and thugged by UK police, or Greenwald's right to report the news without having his loved ones captured and robbed, or for that matter Snowden's right to provide that news to Greenwald and other journalists, the UK's Home Office considers you to be condoning—and possibly aiding and abetting—terrorism.
In the US, the rhetoric has been pretty much the same, with the exception that the pro-NSA thugs in the US need to always include some meaningless assurances that of course they know civil liberties are also important—whatever—but the message was the same. If you are anti-NSA, you are pro-terrorist.
Now, much has been made of the claim that the USA and the UK governments are concerned about "sensitive stolen information", in other words, data stolen by Snowden (and other whistle-blowers) and shared with journalists and then the peoples of the world as these facts have been reported. But let us understand the ludicrous nature of this complaint by the respective spy-thug support networks. What was "stolen" from the US and UK governments was evidence showing their criminal conspiracy to STEAL the data of people all over the world, including from their own citizens.
THAT is what these despicable spy- and police-thug regimes would now call "terrorism"—revealing evidence that demonstrates their crimes against humanity! And if you would speak up to object to this outrageous and dangerous absurdity, and to instead support the Snowden revelations, then yes, you also are suspect, and you also might need to be detained and robbed, by the secret police, because you just might be a terrorist.
You have no problem with that, do you? You feel safer after all, right? And you weren't going to be needing your privacy anyway, right? Or your rights of any sort—except your right to consume like a good sheeple. You won't be a threat to anyone—will you?