Updated: May 31
When laws cause terror something is wrong
Every time that something bad happens there is an overreaction from the government. They come out with a flurry of laws that are not needed. In fact, it is mostly the opposite. You will find a clear pattern where laws are enabled to protect you and then end up not protecting but abusing you.
We had a saying in the old police regarding Judges Rules: “You have the right to remain silent, but I will advise you not to use that right, you guilty bastard...” followed by a few punches to ensure proper confession follows. And it was highly unlawful, of course, but don’t tell me that it did not happen. Wherever power is granted, it is abused. That is human nature in its essence. There is much psychological evidence of the above. In the Nazi concentration camps we saw that it took three days for even the mildest camp guard to become a kicking beast. Read my recent book written with my wife, “When Does It End?” for more details. The follow-up book is 90% written and will be out soon. Therefore, I am extremely wary and suspicious of any infringement on what is known as human rights. This starts with limiting police powers.
I have long made a stand against the idea of the FBI having the right to arrest you for “lying” to them simply because, as an ex-policeman, I fully understand how to abuse that right. Even where the lie is perhaps not deliberate, perhaps a genuine mistake, a lack of the correct timeline, etc. since it might have happened years ago, you will be arrested. Once arrested, you will be broken financially by the system to defend yourself. We also know that against certain courts you have no chance to begin with. This is not as it should be. That was not the purpose behind the law. Not even the Gestapo, Apartheid Police, and those in Communist countries had such powers. Why is this needed for the FBI, supposedly the premier law enforcement agency in the world?
Of course, they are not the premier law enforcement agency as claimed. Not in my eyes. I said in many books that the FBI lost its ability to conduct terrorist investigations. This is why – a report released by Columbia Law School’s Human Rights Institute in July of 2014 found that all except four cases of domestic US terrorism after 9/11, had direct US involvement in the form of agents or informants: “All of the high-profile domestic terrorism plots of the last decade, with four exceptions, were actually FBI sting operations - plots conducted with the direct involvement of law enforcement informants or agents, including plots that were proposed or led by informants. According to multiple studies, nearly 50% of the more than 500 federal counter-terrorism convictions resulted from informant-based cases; almost 30 percent of those cases were sting operations in which the informant played an active role in the underlying plot.”
Another word for “sting operations” is “entrapment.” The Boston Marathon bombing is one of those excluded, where the FBI apparently did not play a role but they were warned by the Russian (see the irony) FSB. This should be extremely worrying if you are an American reading here. It means that the Deep State – that is the CIA / FBI and IC bureaucrats, actively encouraged the attacks, they are ultimately behind them.
You would expect at least in Britain, a place that does not have a Bill of Rights because it is not needed, fair play and all that, to not follow their cousins’ beastliness. Yet, we now know that a British Bobby can stop you, and ask for your access code to your phone and laptop, and if refused, arrest you under terrorism laws. And you will be found guilty too as was a fellow just this past week. What an abuse of power and why the silence on this? It is disgusting. We expect better from those that are so fond of pointing fingers to everyone else.
And yet it is easy to fall in the trap, especially in counterterrorism. I recall that in 1989 I spoke to an officer that I trusted. He asked me if I would like to join a special unit hidden in the Security Branch. He made it sound so interesting, “Die opspoor en uitwis van terrorisme.” In English, “The Detecting and eradicating terrorism.” That was C1, Vlakplaas, under command of Eugene de Kok (he was not the officer involved). I liked that idea. I was 22 years old, a sergeant in the police, used to violence at a scale which few can imagine (see Mean Streets – Life in the Apartheid Police). I loved the idea of hunting terrorists and killing them. Why not, if you don’t get them first they will get you. Or, sometimes, a source must be protected. The courts, I can tell you, we felt, were way too lenient and not about to make our lives easier. Therefore, justice had to be done in the street way.
My father, a highly respected regional court magistrate known for hearing terrorism cases was most upset. “Who,” he asked in a tone that I never heard him use before “decides who dies? You did not enlist to murder people. You enlisted to save people. You have saved people. Don’t come with such nonsense to me. You investigate the crime and bring the suspects to court where we will decide what happens further... not you!” My brother, at the time, was working in Security Branch as a conscript advocate, he knew they were burning files. They knew that Mr. Mandela would be released. I declined the offer.
I am older now. I changed my views at university. I have law degrees, much more experience, and I understand the danger clearly. Let us not become terrorists ourselves with unnecessary laws. Let us not sign away our rights to a turd (they float in what they talk) politician to be abused. They are above the law, yes, above, in all countries, it is called corruption. But you are not. When you give too much power to your protectors, they will bite you in the ass. It is a simple fact of life and yet we forget it during times of panic.