|Enemies of the State: Abu Hamza, left, and Bishop Mark Davies, right, face tagging and 24 hour surveillance...|
Readers will notice how both of the dangerous personalities pictured above have 'hook' type accessories in close proximity to their arms. This is because they both constitute a threat to national security. The level is currently a shade between orange and red, but looks like red.
This is it.
But the question is: are they equally as dangerous?
Are they equally as dangerous?
The Sun newspaper reported just two days ago that 'dangerous criminals' are to be tracked from space and monitored 24-hours a day. Some are worried that once certain views are criminalised then that person could be you and that if you don't agree with what your Government is doing you could be next for tagging.
But are these fears justified? Not at all. As The Sun would say, criminals deserve this kind of treatment and who are we to oppose the State? If we stopped ourselves being one day branded criminals in thought, word or speech, would that not make us criminals? The answer is yes, so as David Cameron would say, "Get with the Programme! LOL!"
Readers will be aware that at the same time as serious enemies of the State like Davies, Nichols and the less concerning Hamza have been claiming generous donations in terms of subsidies and living in a big house, they haven't recanted their views. This alone, surely, justifies the kind of surveillance necessary to protect good citizens like Ben Summerskill of Stonewall, whose greatest fear is that Catholics will slaughter homosexuals after the Sanctus bell at Mass as a fitting sacrifice to God unless the Soho Masses are allowed to continue.
|A Catholic notices a homosexual at Mass|
While its obvious that the goggle-eyed, hook-handed terror-monster Bishop Davies fits this bill perfectly as an example of a man you wouldn't like to be sat opposite on the Tube, it will come as a surprise to many that Hamza, a gently spoken opponent to the Government on foreign policy issues, will too experience what some campaigners have called a 'real and serious breach of civil liberty'. Campaigners argue that if these people are such a threat to security, "Why is it that they are allowed to shop at Tescos and stuff? Shouldn't they be in jail or something? Or deported?"
|Bishop Egan on retreat with Archbishop Vincent Nichols|
Violent Vince could be subjected to a high level of State satellite surveillance like Davies and Hamza - through either mobile phone or one of G4S's handy ankle warmers - an electronic tag. It was 'Rock the Boat, Baby, Vince' that alarmed a 'Soho Mass' community of LGBT peacemakers when he informed them that their days were numbered and that if they don't stop coming to Mass, the 'safe-haven' status of their parish church would soon end, and the building would be rigged with explosives at their 'Requiem LGBT Mass'.
|Terrifying: Bishop Davies teaches his students 'The Rosary'|
As The Sun reports, 'Justice Secretary Chris Grayling said:
“Satellite tagging will allow us to keep a much closer watch on high-risk and persistent offenders, who cause so much harm. Monitoring the movements of dangerous offenders will be vital in cutting crime.”How right the Justice Secretary is. It is high time that Britain was made safe from extremists, especially religious types who refuse to be moderate, as well as other persistent and high-risk offenders.
Shami Chakrabati of Liberty said:
"I'm concerned about the level of surveillance going on in society, especially when people look into my Marxist sympathies and survey the kind of stuff I spout in the media. With violent and dangerous criminals like Davies, supportive of threatening and terrorising hate-speech against the gay community and his dismissal of their desires for equal marriage, I fully support the move. There is no crime higher than criticizing 'gay marriage'. It's treason against the doctrine of equality. But in the case of that Abu Hamza, he looks so kind and cuddly and I am yet to see any evidence actually linking him with plots to blow up buildings or encouraging people to attack key institutions in the UK. In his case, we should err on the side of civil liberties'.