sighmoon
Well-Known Member
Last week, the leading news article on this site was completely unboaty, about the number of foiled terrorist attacks. Now I've got this week's YM, and there's an article urging us all to be vigilant against terrorists.
If I should haul up an Al Qaeda submarine with my mackerel, I'll be sure to let the authorities know, but other than that, what am I supposed to be looking out for? Are terrorists hiding in our cockpit lockers ready to hijack us?
In the future, so they say, they'll be taking measures against insurgent action being launched from swinging moorings, with officials keeping records of every departure and arrival.
If it were about preventing deaths, surely they'd focus on more probable risks, like road deaths. Or even nut cancer awareness.
I don't really believe it's about preventing terorrism either. 9/11 was some guys with knives. But despite the hysteria, you can still buy glass bottles to take on a plane, which would be equally effective.
These measures only get through parliament because we have a sycophantic opposition, and a media gagged with the example of Andrew Gilligan.
So what's it really about? Who benefits? Is it to create jobs? Is the company that's going to monitor us a labour party donor?
If I should haul up an Al Qaeda submarine with my mackerel, I'll be sure to let the authorities know, but other than that, what am I supposed to be looking out for? Are terrorists hiding in our cockpit lockers ready to hijack us?
In the future, so they say, they'll be taking measures against insurgent action being launched from swinging moorings, with officials keeping records of every departure and arrival.
If it were about preventing deaths, surely they'd focus on more probable risks, like road deaths. Or even nut cancer awareness.
I don't really believe it's about preventing terorrism either. 9/11 was some guys with knives. But despite the hysteria, you can still buy glass bottles to take on a plane, which would be equally effective.
These measures only get through parliament because we have a sycophantic opposition, and a media gagged with the example of Andrew Gilligan.
So what's it really about? Who benefits? Is it to create jobs? Is the company that's going to monitor us a labour party donor?