Part 2 - Look Out Britain. It's Time To Lose Your Rights

New terror measures aimed at ""acts preparatory to terrorism" are set to be proposed on Monday, according to The Guardian. The Independent focuses on the "indirect incitement".

The new laws aim at banning those who have attended terrorist training camps from Britain - a move that makes sense though it how one could determine this expeditiously I am not sure. Of larger concern is expanding the "incitement" laws. What exactly might be considered "indirect" incitement? According to the articles, it would be such things as calling suicide bombers "martyrs." My guess is that the line would not remain so narrow.

Such "pre-crime" and "indirect incitement" laws could strike at the heart of freedom of speech - not to mention intelligent discussion of the issues - such as the causes of terrorism. Would discussions of global conditions of poverty, and U.S. and UK support for dictatorial regimes be considered "legitimating" terrorism, and therefore "indirect incitement." Would discussion of the machinations of power and control in Iraq be considered "indirect incitement?" Since Palestine lies at the heart of much anger fueling "Islamist" terrorism, would being fair in the discussion of that situation be considered "indirect incitement?"

I feel that the proposed legislation moves in a very dangerous direction. In fact, whenever you get into the area of "pre-crime" types of measures, one broadly expands the scope of police (and government) discretion and control. Such moves are ripe for bias and selective enforcement which flies in the face of the supposed freedoms of a "democracy."

Britain, in particular has been dealing with "terrorism" for a long time with the debacle of its policies in Ireland. Somehow, it has dealt with this threat without totally destroying the rights of its citizens. Why would "pre-crime" legislation such as this be needed in the current environment?