Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

UK FBI

Quantum

12:29 / 03.04.06

News today
Tony Blair launched Britain's version of the FBI today with a promise to make life hell for the gangsters, drug barons and people-traffickers who, he said, cost the country more than £20 billion a year.

Launching the Serious Organised Crime Agency (Soca) at Downing Street, the Prime Minister said the problem of organised crime was "greater than ever before".

WTF?
"Soca will also incorporate functions of the immigration and customs agencies" ...
"and he vowed to introduce even tougher powers if necessary"

One more step toward American Britain. I wonder if we get an X-Files section? Is anyone else concerned?

Fist Fun

13:02 / 03.04.06

Why are you concerned about it Quantam? Do you feel that the powers granted to the new agency won't be used to "make life hell for the gangsters, drug barons and people-traffickers" but for something more sinister?

Quantum

14:09 / 03.04.06

After the Menendez shooting, frankly yes. Increased police powers presented with rhetoric like Blair's makes me think we're living in a dystopian 80s future.

Quantum

14:15 / 03.04.06

Rhetoric like this;

"If we find we need to go further, we will go further," he pledged. "There is nothing that should come before the basic liberty of the people in this country to be free from the tyranny of this kind of organised crime."

Read that last sentence again. While saying "blahLIBERTYblahFREEblahTYRANNYblahORGANISEDCRIME" he's describing moves to decrease the civil rights of the entire populace, playing on people's fear to make them compliant.
Does anyone feel they're living under a tyranny of organised crime? Anyone? I get tyrant vibes for sure, but not from the british mafia...

Alex's Grandma

17:25 / 03.04.06

Tony Blair to promote a horse to his cabinet before the end of the year?

He'd appear to be heading in the right direction.

Isadore

23:59 / 03.04.06

Silly question: How does this differ from MI5?

All Acting Regiment

01:55 / 04.04.06

I heard this SOCA have the power to force people to answer questions- i.e. deny their right to silence?

sleazenation

08:24 / 04.04.06

MI5 is not a branch of the police...

Tryphena Absent

11:16 / 04.04.06

Military Intelligence 5.

invisible_al

13:36 / 04.04.06

Legba I think you're talking about this,

Financial reporting orders: Courts can make orders, of up to 20 years, forcing criminals to provide bank statements to ensure they have no crime-related earnings

Disclosure notices - Courts can force suspects to answer questions or provide documents or face imprisonment or fines. Limits the right to silence

from here. At least the courts are still involved and they can't just demand details from you.

All Acting Regiment

21:29 / 04.04.06

Yeah, that's what I meant, thanks.

So we're living under the "Tyranny oforganised crime"? I don't think so. Rather, if they go after big business criminals in a big way, they might make some money back, either through justice or more likely through increased bribes.

You don't get that by catching theives and rapists, in fact the only "reward" for doing the latter would seem to be making people happier and the world better, or other unprofitable ends.

invisible_al

09:11 / 05.04.06

I can definately see a need for this kind of police organisation, crime is global and thing like people trafficing and forced prositution, drug smuggling, internet fraud, pedophiles trading photos over the internet etc etc all need an organised response to them.

What I object to is the increase in powers, some of which without meaningful oversight, even though I actually have a certain ammount of respect for judges many of whom know where the limits of the law should be. I'd be happier if Parliament actually had powers to examine this sort of organisation after the fact more like the states as opposed to the rather toothless committees we have at the moment.

Quantum

09:19 / 05.04.06

if they go after big business criminals in a big way

No, the corporate criminals aren't the targets at all, it's smugglers they're after. The motive is decreasing the losses due to the black market rather than increasing the bribes I think. 'Criminals cost the people of Britain ten gazillion pounds every heartbeat! Only SOCA can save us now!'

Quantum

09:22 / 05.04.06

Quantum

09:32 / 05.04.06

I think I'm so concerned because I saw V for Vendetta the other day and it foreshadows a lot of things that are really happening. Like this.
Complacency is the enemy of freedom and we are being numbed by repeated atrocity and outrage, manipulated by a huge propaganda and spin machine that is obvious to everyone, yet we do nothing and indeed *can* do nothing. We as a populace have been rendered impotent and are kept that way by an illusion of danger projected in order to... oh what's the point.
I must remember my conditioning, we are not living in a dystopian police state, we are not living in a dystopian police state, we are not living in a dystopian police state...

sleazenation

16:02 / 05.04.06

I've just seen the new SOCA logo and it does seem faintly ridiculous - like it was designed for for some 1980s kids cartoon - Some have compared it to the thundercats logo... see the logo here

unheimlich manoeuvre

23:25 / 05.04.06

This seems like pandering to the Law and Order vote in the run up to the local elections.
Is this going to lead to a reduction in crime? The government should be addressing the causes of crime. Investment in our neighbours in Eastern Europe would reduce people trafficking. Legalisation of some drugs would increase tax revenue and reduce smuggling. Instead we get this, more authoritarianism. Totalitarian democracy?

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

00:22 / 06.04.06

No, the corporate criminals aren't the targets at all, it's smugglers they're after.

Now, if they were giving the SFO greater powers...

Our Lady Has Left the Building

08:08 / 06.04.06

I was under the impression that it wasn't getting the crims that was the problem, it was seizing the assets which they unloaded on divorced wives and friends. I'm not sure what this does other than make Labour look as though it's being busy.

sleazenation

08:51 / 06.04.06

I don't see this new organization having much effect on crime in real terms, but that isn't whay it has been created. It's there so the Labour leadership can say 'SEE! We are doing something on Crime'. But even on this level I can't see the new agency working. The growing disatisfaction with New Labour is more diffuse and general... with different people focusing on different areas. This seems more like a desperate and largely doomed bid for popularity...

Quantum

13:01 / 06.04.06

The logo looks like an international supervillain's design, S.P.E.C.T.R.E. or something, I can see it twenty feet across inlaid on the floor of an office containing an elaborate death-trap. Ludicrous.

Supaglue

09:20 / 13.04.06

It's a worrying bit of legislation and its being used to get general law and order measures under the carpet, as it were.

Powers of arrest for example

The powers mean people can be arrested for all offences, even minor ones like painting graffiti and dropping litter.

Currently officers can only arrest people suspected of committing crimes with at least a five-year jail sentence - although there are exemptions.

But the powers of arrest will not be automatic, as police officers will have to apply a "necessity test".

and the justification for it....

"These tough new powers make a significant contribution to creating a modern, efficient police service equipping frontline officers with the tools they need to fight modern crime effectively and keep our neighbourhoods safe,"

WTF has that got to do with Serious Organised Crime?

Baobab Branches and Plastic

11:59 / 13.04.06

This really scares me:

Terrorism act becomes law:
"The Terrorism Act 2006 (Adobe PDF - 216 Kb) has also become law, receiving Royal Assent on 30 March 2006. The new law makes it a criminal offence to encourage terrorism, including to glorify terrorism; to disseminate terrorist publications, including by extremist bookshops and through Internet activity; to prepare or plan to commit a terrorist act, or to assist others to do so; and to give or receive terrorist training, or to attend a terrorist training camp."
link here)

Who gets to define these things?

Does this mean that we can't be revolutionaries no more with out being criminals?

Interesting none of the UK website I visited offer a clear explanation of what is defined as terrorism (as this guardian article investigates here

scaredy time I'm afraid!

Baobab Branches and Plastic

12:12 / 13.04.06

Sorry I just noticed that the Guardian Article I quoted was from May 7th 2001... which while still interesting is perhaps a little dated considering world events.

Redundant now considering Guantanamo and Abu Gharaib(sic) as it doesn't look you can really have a clear 'us' and 'them' delineation on terror on a national level and makes it seem more appealling to fight/rail/argue against the master class... which is now might be considered an act of terror.

All Acting Regiment

14:31 / 13.04.06

Just to chime in with something rather phatic, but the SOCA logo looks like my cat playing with a ball of wool.

Supaglue

17:50 / 16.04.06

That's one badass cat you got there....

Quantum

10:58 / 08.06.06

No more drug dealers to bust? What exactly is SOCA for again? They weren't mentioned or credited for this bust, which seems right up their alley. Can we call for their disbanding yet?

Mister Saturn

06:02 / 09.06.06

Classic British spirit I say - they already put in milk, sugar and lemon in a cup of tea - they can never enjoy a nice plain cup of green tea!

Just how many law enforcement organisations does UK have or even need?
* British Transport Police
* Civil Nuclear Constabulary
* Interpol
* Ministry of Defence Police
* National Crime Squad
* National Criminal Intelligence Service
* Scotland Yard
* Scottish Drug Enforcement Agency
* Serious Organised Crime Agency

That would make a good cup of tea for the British government, I suppose.

Add Your Reply