Comments on: “The real threat the the life of the nation” http://crookedtimber.org/2004/12/17/the-real-threat-the-the-life-of-the-nation/ Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made Sat, 26 May 2012 10:58:25 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Crooked Timber » » Conservative Affirmative Action Again http://crookedtimber.org/2004/12/17/the-real-threat-the-the-life-of-the-nation/comment-page-1/#comment-114369 Crooked Timber » » Conservative Affirmative Action Again Mon, 24 Oct 2005 19:15:44 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=2670#comment-114369 [...] But then I would say that, wouldn’t I. Entertaining as it is to see something like my April 1 squib recycled as a quasi-serious plan of action, it can’t compete with Chris’s experience last year, of being (perhaps unintentionally) directly plagiarized by William Gibson. Now that’s real geek street-cred. posted on Monday, October 24th, 2005 at 2:07 pm Post a comment [...] [...] But then I would say that, wouldn’t I. Entertaining as it is to see something like my April 1 squib recycled as a quasi-serious plan of action, it can’t compete with Chris’s experience last year, of being (perhaps unintentionally) directly plagiarized by William Gibson. Now that’s real geek street-cred. posted on Monday, October 24th, 2005 at 2:07 pm Post a comment [...]

]]> By: Crooked Timber » » London Pride http://crookedtimber.org/2004/12/17/the-real-threat-the-the-life-of-the-nation/comment-page-1/#comment-77678 Crooked Timber » » London Pride Thu, 07 Jul 2005 15:51:30 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=2670#comment-77678 [...] [...] [...] [...]

]]> By: chris http://crookedtimber.org/2004/12/17/the-real-threat-the-the-life-of-the-nation/comment-page-1/#comment-54851 chris Mon, 20 Dec 2004 12:14:23 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=2670#comment-54851 <i>Incidentally, what countries have disappeared in the last 50 years?</i> By assimilation: Tibet, Sikkim, Zanzibar, Western (Spanish) Sahara, South Yemen, temporarily East Timor, Kuwait. By disintegration: Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia. Incidentally, what countries have disappeared in the last 50 years? By assimilation: Tibet, Sikkim, Zanzibar, Western (Spanish) Sahara, South Yemen, temporarily East Timor, Kuwait. By disintegration: Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia.

]]> By: Paul in LA http://crookedtimber.org/2004/12/17/the-real-threat-the-the-life-of-the-nation/comment-page-1/#comment-54850 Paul in LA Mon, 20 Dec 2004 01:58:21 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=2670#comment-54850 "Indeed. Germany was still Germany, under Bismarck, under Hitler, and under Adenauer. Much ado about nothing." Hilarious. Germany was still Germany under Hitler? Germany, like any free state, is only Germany when free. Enslavement under Hitler was not freedom. Had Hitler enslaved Britain, Britain would have ceased to be, until restored to freedom. Confusing culture for free states is a major error -- the failure to understand that our freedoms are NOT given us by government or law, not taken away by terrorists, or traitors, and not found in the rule of any majority. They are innate. -- “Indeed. Germany was still Germany, under Bismarck, under Hitler, and under Adenauer. Much ado about nothing.” Hilarious. Germany was still Germany under Hitler? Germany, like any free state, is only Germany when free. Enslavement under Hitler was not freedom. Had Hitler enslaved Britain, Britain would have ceased to be, until restored to freedom. Confusing culture for free states is a major error—the failure to understand that our freedoms are NOT given us by government or law, not taken away by terrorists, or traitors, and not found in the rule of any majority. They are innate. —

]]> By: Paul in LA http://crookedtimber.org/2004/12/17/the-real-threat-the-the-life-of-the-nation/comment-page-1/#comment-54849 Paul in LA Mon, 20 Dec 2004 01:57:00 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=2670#comment-54849 "Indeed. Germany was still Germany, under Bismarck, under Hitler, and under Adenauer. Much ado about nothing." Hilarious. Germany was still Germany under Hitler? Germany, like any free state, is only Germany when free. Enslavement under Hitler was not freedom. Had Hitler enslaved Britain, Britain would have ceased to be, until restored to freedom. Confusing culture for free states is a major error -- the failure to understand that our freedoms are NOT given us by government or law, not taken away by terrorists, or traitors, and not found in the rule of any majority. They are innate. -- “Indeed. Germany was still Germany, under Bismarck, under Hitler, and under Adenauer. Much ado about nothing.” Hilarious. Germany was still Germany under Hitler? Germany, like any free state, is only Germany when free. Enslavement under Hitler was not freedom. Had Hitler enslaved Britain, Britain would have ceased to be, until restored to freedom. Confusing culture for free states is a major error—the failure to understand that our freedoms are NOT given us by government or law, not taken away by terrorists, or traitors, and not found in the rule of any majority. They are innate. —

]]> By: bob mcmanus http://crookedtimber.org/2004/12/17/the-real-threat-the-the-life-of-the-nation/comment-page-1/#comment-54848 bob mcmanus Sun, 19 Dec 2004 17:36:53 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=2670#comment-54848 "And as citizens of the United Kingdom, they have every right to vote and speak out in favor of their own preferred (and undoubtedly tiny minority) vision of the ideal British society. Fortunately, though, another grand British tradition—a sovereign, democratic parliament—will consign the Lords’ fatuous pomposity to well-deserved irrelevance." Indeed. Germany was still Germany, under Bismarck, under Hitler, and under Adenauer. Much ado about nothing. “And as citizens of the United Kingdom, they have every right to vote and speak out in favor of their own preferred (and undoubtedly tiny minority) vision of the ideal British society. Fortunately, though, another grand British tradition—a sovereign, democratic parliament—will consign the Lords’ fatuous pomposity to well-deserved irrelevance.” Indeed. Germany was still Germany, under Bismarck, under Hitler, and under Adenauer. Much ado about nothing.

]]> By: Pete http://crookedtimber.org/2004/12/17/the-real-threat-the-the-life-of-the-nation/comment-page-1/#comment-54847 Pete Sun, 19 Dec 2004 06:46:21 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=2670#comment-54847 They are absolutely right. What, exactly, are people afraid that these terrorists might do? Bomb central London? Already been done, by the IRA; hence the "Ring of Steel" security there. Put communities into a state of war? Already been done, by the IRA and the UVF, the former using American weapons bought with American money. Blow up the Cabinet? Already been tried; the Brighton Hotel bombing had miraculously few casualties despite demolishing the building. Flatten a major city? Already been done, by the Nazis. Compared to what the country has withstood, a few angry militants are just another matter for the police. They are absolutely right. What, exactly, are people afraid that these terrorists might do? Bomb central London? Already been done, by the IRA; hence the “Ring of Steel” security there. Put communities into a state of war? Already been done, by the IRA and the UVF, the former using American weapons bought with American money. Blow up the Cabinet? Already been tried; the Brighton Hotel bombing had miraculously few casualties despite demolishing the building. Flatten a major city? Already been done, by the Nazis. Compared to what the country has withstood, a few angry militants are just another matter for the police.

]]> By: Carol http://crookedtimber.org/2004/12/17/the-real-threat-the-the-life-of-the-nation/comment-page-1/#comment-54846 Carol Sun, 19 Dec 2004 02:51:45 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=2670#comment-54846 Well, I don't know about you but I can't wait until this war on tourism is over. A very foolish idea in the first place, if you ask me. Well, I don’t know about you but I can’t wait until this war on tourism is over. A very foolish idea in the first place, if you ask me.

]]> By: Matt McGrattan http://crookedtimber.org/2004/12/17/the-real-threat-the-the-life-of-the-nation/comment-page-1/#comment-54845 Matt McGrattan Sat, 18 Dec 2004 23:06:17 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=2670#comment-54845 Yes, Dan, but the whole point is that this is not war-time. Unless you think of the erroneously named 'War on Terror' as bearing any kind of structural similarity with the past wars under which Habeas Corpus was suspended and also think, erroneously, that the actions (whether alleged or genuine) of the men detained at Belmarsh in any way resemble the actions of combatants in a war. Yes, Dan, but the whole point is that this is not war-time. Unless you think of the erroneously named ‘War on Terror’ as bearing any kind of structural similarity with the past wars under which Habeas Corpus was suspended and also think, erroneously, that the actions (whether alleged or genuine) of the men detained at Belmarsh in any way resemble the actions of combatants in a war.

]]> By: Dan Simon http://crookedtimber.org/2004/12/17/the-real-threat-the-the-life-of-the-nation/comment-page-1/#comment-54844 Dan Simon Sat, 18 Dec 2004 22:44:27 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=2670#comment-54844 <i>I’d like instances of legislation enacted by Parliament in the past which allows for detention without trial. Preferrably outside of war-time.</i> You mean, because the abrogation of <i>Habeas Corpus</i> in wartime, particularly with respect to foreign detainees--say, prisoners of war--is so common in British (and world) history as to be completely routine? <i>Further, it seems to me that you are utterly wrong with respect to the absence of a legal and philosophical tradition in the UK which supports the right of a man to be free from the risk of imprisonment except after facing trial.</i> The principal of <i>Habeas Corpus</i> certainly has a long, esteemed tradition in Great Britain. The breadth of its application, however, has evolved over time--note, for example, the use of the term "free man" or "freeman" in the quotations you provided. The notion that foreigners suspected of terrorism might fall under its purview is a very recent one indeed. I’d like instances of legislation enacted by Parliament in the past which allows for detention without trial. Preferrably outside of war-time. You mean, because the abrogation of Habeas Corpus in wartime, particularly with respect to foreign detainees—say, prisoners of war—is so common in British (and world) history as to be completely routine? Further, it seems to me that you are utterly wrong with respect to the absence of a legal and philosophical tradition in the UK which supports the right of a man to be free from the risk of imprisonment except after facing trial. The principal of Habeas Corpus certainly has a long, esteemed tradition in Great Britain. The breadth of its application, however, has evolved over time—note, for example, the use of the term “free man” or “freeman” in the quotations you provided. The notion that foreigners suspected of terrorism might fall under its purview is a very recent one indeed.

]]> By: Matt McGrattan http://crookedtimber.org/2004/12/17/the-real-threat-the-the-life-of-the-nation/comment-page-1/#comment-54843 Matt McGrattan Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:37:45 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=2670#comment-54843 Dan: I'd like instances of legislation enacted by Parliament in the past which allows for detention without trial. Preferrably outside of war-time. Further, it seems to me that you are utterly wrong with respect to the absence of a legal and philosophical tradition in the UK which supports the right of a man to be free from the risk of imprisonment except after facing trial. Today's Independent newspaper helpfully provides a list of quotes: "No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights [etc. etc.] except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land" - Habeas Corpus Act, 1679 "No freeman shall be taken or imprisoned.. except by the lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land" - Magna Carta, 1215 "Every court of criminal justice must have the power of correcting the greatest and most dangerous of all abuses of the forms of law -- that of the protracted imprisonment of the accused, untried, perhaps not ever intended to be tried, nay, it may be, not informed of the nature of the charge against him, or the name of accuser", David Hume, 1797 They supply a dozen or so more similar quotes. Covering the whole of the period from 1215 to the 1970s at the height of the IRA mainland terror campaign. The right to freedom from imprisonment without trial is an ancient one indeed, and it's certainly <i>not</i> an import from the USA or continental Europe. Dan: I’d like instances of legislation enacted by Parliament in the past which allows for detention without trial. Preferrably outside of war-time. Further, it seems to me that you are utterly wrong with respect to the absence of a legal and philosophical tradition in the UK which supports the right of a man to be free from the risk of imprisonment except after facing trial. Today’s Independent newspaper helpfully provides a list of quotes: “No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights [etc. etc.] except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land” – Habeas Corpus Act, 1679 “No freeman shall be taken or imprisoned.. except by the lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land” – Magna Carta, 1215 “Every court of criminal justice must have the power of correcting the greatest and most dangerous of all abuses of the forms of law—that of the protracted imprisonment of the accused, untried, perhaps not ever intended to be tried, nay, it may be, not informed of the nature of the charge against him, or the name of accuser”, David Hume, 1797 They supply a dozen or so more similar quotes. Covering the whole of the period from 1215 to the 1970s at the height of the IRA mainland terror campaign. The right to freedom from imprisonment without trial is an ancient one indeed, and it’s certainly not an import from the USA or continental Europe.

]]> By: Nabakov http://crookedtimber.org/2004/12/17/the-real-threat-the-the-life-of-the-nation/comment-page-1/#comment-54842 Nabakov Sat, 18 Dec 2004 17:49:05 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=2670#comment-54842 I think Dan S that you may be confusing a Law Lord with the Law Lords with the House of Lords. They are all related but not quite all the same thing. "And until very recently, the idea of enshrining such views in parliamentary tradition—let alone declaring them some kind of vital part of the British national character—wouldn’t have passed the giggle test." Start with the Putney Debates and work forward. Centuries of refutable fun there. I think Dan S that you may be confusing a Law Lord with the Law Lords with the House of Lords. They are all related but not quite all the same thing. “And until very recently, the idea of enshrining such views in parliamentary tradition—let alone declaring them some kind of vital part of the British national character—wouldn’t have passed the giggle test.” Start with the Putney Debates and work forward. Centuries of refutable fun there.

]]> By: David B http://crookedtimber.org/2004/12/17/the-real-threat-the-the-life-of-the-nation/comment-page-1/#comment-54841 David B Sat, 18 Dec 2004 13:31:31 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=2670#comment-54841 It takes a certain amount of chutzpah for Lord Hoffman (a South African) to lecture the British on their national interests. Some may recall that Hoffman was also the judge who screwed up the first decision on the Pinochet extradition by forgetting to mention that his (Hoffman's) wife was a big cheese in Amnesty International. It takes a certain amount of chutzpah for Lord Hoffman (a South African) to lecture the British on their national interests. Some may recall that Hoffman was also the judge who screwed up the first decision on the Pinochet extradition by forgetting to mention that his (Hoffman’s) wife was a big cheese in Amnesty International.

]]> By: Idiot/Savant http://crookedtimber.org/2004/12/17/the-real-threat-the-the-life-of-the-nation/comment-page-1/#comment-54840 Idiot/Savant Sat, 18 Dec 2004 11:57:20 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=2670#comment-54840 In light of the British government's insistence on continuing to hold the men until the law is reviewed, Lord Hoffman is looking righter by the minute. But his government has gone beyond sacrificing human rights for safety to sacrificing the rule of law itself. The dangers of this were pointed out in the famous exchange between Sir Thomas More and William Roper in A Man For All Seasons: <blockquote> <p><b>Roper:</b> So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law!</p> <p><b>More:</b> Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? <p><b>Roper:</b> I'd cut down every law in England to do that! <p><b>More:</b> Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you - where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast - man's laws, not God's - and if you cut them down - and you're just the man to do it - d'you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. </p></p></p></blockquote> Where will the British government hide, once they have finished cutting England's laws flat? In light of the British government’s insistence on continuing to hold the men until the law is reviewed, Lord Hoffman is looking righter by the minute. But his government has gone beyond sacrificing human rights for safety to sacrificing the rule of law itself. The dangers of this were pointed out in the famous exchange between Sir Thomas More and William Roper in A Man For All Seasons:

Roper: So now you’d give the Devil benefit of law!

More: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?

Roper: I’d cut down every law in England to do that!

More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you – where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country’s planted thick with laws from coast to coast – man’s laws, not God’s – and if you cut them down – and you’re just the man to do it – d’you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake.

Where will the British government hide, once they have finished cutting England’s laws flat? ]]> By: Dan Simon http://crookedtimber.org/2004/12/17/the-real-threat-the-the-life-of-the-nation/comment-page-1/#comment-54839 Dan Simon Sat, 18 Dec 2004 07:47:19 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=2670#comment-54839 <i>The real threat to the life of the nation, in the sense of a people living in accordance with its traditional laws and political values, comes not from terrorism but from laws such as these.</i> As a purely historical matter, this is a load of steaming bovine excrement. The United Kingdom has a very, very long tradition of enacting laws far more draconian than these to deal with foreign threats. The woolly-minded internationalist civil libertarianism the Lords are invoking is essentially a postwar American import, with a dash of Continental radicalism thrown in. And until very recently, the idea of enshrining such views in parliamentary tradition--let alone declaring them some kind of vital part of the British national character--wouldn't have passed the giggle test. What the Lords really mean, of course, when they talk about "a threat to the life of the nation, in the sense of a people living in accordance with its....political values", is the threat to their sense of a people living in accordance with the Lords' <i>own current</i> political values. And as citizens of the United Kingdom, they have every right to vote and speak out in favor of their own preferred (and undoubtedly tiny minority) vision of the ideal British society. Fortunately, though, another grand British tradition--a sovereign, democratic parliament--will consign the Lords' fatuous pomposity to well-deserved irrelevance. The real threat to the life of the nation, in the sense of a people living in accordance with its traditional laws and political values, comes not from terrorism but from laws such as these. As a purely historical matter, this is a load of steaming bovine excrement. The United Kingdom has a very, very long tradition of enacting laws far more draconian than these to deal with foreign threats. The woolly-minded internationalist civil libertarianism the Lords are invoking is essentially a postwar American import, with a dash of Continental radicalism thrown in. And until very recently, the idea of enshrining such views in parliamentary tradition—let alone declaring them some kind of vital part of the British national character—wouldn’t have passed the giggle test. What the Lords really mean, of course, when they talk about “a threat to the life of the nation, in the sense of a people living in accordance with its….political values”, is the threat to their sense of a people living in accordance with the Lords’ own current political values. And as citizens of the United Kingdom, they have every right to vote and speak out in favor of their own preferred (and undoubtedly tiny minority) vision of the ideal British society. Fortunately, though, another grand British tradition—a sovereign, democratic parliament—will consign the Lords’ fatuous pomposity to well-deserved irrelevance.

]]>