Skip to content or view screen version

Hidden Article

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

soldiers on our streets

. | 25.03.2009 10:46 | G20 London Summit | Anti-militarism | Social Struggles | Terror War | World

the army is being deployed to "tackle" protestors

"In a stunning conversation with a friend, who is a serving member of the Armed Forces, over the weekend, it was revealed that transfers to regiments and other units in the UK on home duties are being undertaken by the MOD based upon whether an individual was prepared to 'open fire' on UK citizens during civil disturbances."

 http://thejournal.parker-joseph.co.uk/blog/_archives/2009/3/2/4109792.html

.

Comments

Hide 1 hidden comment or hide all comments

Wow!

25.03.2009 12:05

So I'll tell my mates:

I read on Indymedia that someone's blog said that a friend of the blogger had had a conversation with someone else in which it was mentioned that... oh never mind.

Squatticus


RE:WOW

25.03.2009 12:30

if you read the blog post it also shows this claim is supported by an article in the mirror earlier this month, you are kidding yourself if you think we are that far away from it.

RE:WOW


Re:WOW

25.03.2009 13:07

The bogus claim is not supported by the Express (not Mirror) article, which is itself bullshit - the army is always on standby, and is always the last resort option for public disorder should the police totally lose control.

I've heard this joke before:
"Army goes on standby to avert May Day mayhem"
"Police and Army on Docklands anarchist alert"
"Army on standby to halt petrol blockades"
"Riot fear army on standby to move Gilligan"
"Army on standby for mass killings"
"Army on standby as prison staff prepare to go on strike"
"Army on standby as crisis endangers lives"
"UK government plans to put the army on standby to cope with Y2K"

ACAB


Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

And heres the proof

25.03.2009 13:33

Gomez


human rights

25.03.2009 16:06

Of course it's possibly just a scare tactic from the government etc but they do seem to have the right to kill us if they wish! This is what happens when your country is signed away to EU control (aka treason)

The right for some vaguely defined army or police force to shoot you dead with impunity is codified in EU law.
The EU has the power and authority to apply an instant death penalty to you,
under The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
Better known to us as The Human Rights Act.

 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/ukpga_19980042_en_3

SCHEDULES
Section 1(3).
SCHEDULE 1

The Articles

Part I

The Convention

Rights and Freedoms

Article 2

Right to life

1 Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided by law.
2 Deprivation of life shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention of this Article when it results from the use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary:
(a) in defence of any person from unlawful violence;
(b) in order to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained;
(c) in action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection.


erm


The ECHR is not 'EU law'

25.03.2009 16:52

UK law would view that the *necessary* use of force the same way, e.g. Section 3 of the Criminal Law Act 1967.

The right to life cannot be legally absolute, as that would cause unresolvable situations, on maternity wards for example.

The EU doesn't have any power or authority under the ECHR, it is not a signatory. You seem to be confusing the EU with the Council of Europe.

Whether it would be treasonous for a sovereign representative to sign away 'your country' to EU control is a purely academic question which need not trouble us.

streetlawyer


the only thing

25.03.2009 22:03

that all states regardless of political persuasion have in common and which is recognised by all other states, is the use of violence against its own subjects/citizens.

scientist


Hide 1 hidden comment or hide all comments