Smoke floats over London. It is the smoke from piles of burning commodities, which were imported from China, India, Arabia, South America, Burma, and other places where human slavery is regularly practiced. Yet, today you're "outlining action" against the riots.
Do I understand correct? Three years ago, you said "we will celebrate the sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights," which includes "the prohibition of slavery and torture." (Conservatives.com) If you believe in the prohibition of slavery, then, naturally, you must believe in the prohibition of the products of slavery? I understand this logic may be a bit involved for political party to understand -- but there cannot be products of slavery without there first being slavery.
The setting on fire of these products, the mass burnings of clothing from forced labor mills, the bonfires that swallow up the commodities coming out of slave fields -- these fires are in fact, the true spirit of the prohibition of slavery. What have you done to stop slavery? You celebrate an event based on prohibiting it, but then you accuse those who fulfill this policy as being "rioters." Why is it that when a man acts like slavery is prohibited, he is called a rioter? Why is that when someone speaks like slavery is prohibited, but defends it viciously, he is called a politician? It is quite clear that the rioter is the only legitimate expression of government under a state that claims to oppose slavery but imports its products by the ton.
Oh, there's another interesting little right you seem to support: "Great rights were proclaimed: the right to life, liberty and security of person" and "the presumption of innocence." That's very interesting -- yesterday, your political party's president said "has authorized police to use whatever methods necessary to curb the spreading anarchy." By anarchy, of course, what he means is the mass destruction of the products of sweatshop labor and forced labor. Being surrounded by police officers carrying automatic machine guns, he expressed his point thoroughly: "Nothing is off the table!" (IBTimes.com)
The International Business Times reports: "many media commentators are demanding that the UK absolve its 'soft policing' practices as quickly as possible." The only media commentators who have done this are those owned by the same corporations that own IB Times. They should say more specifically, "We, the corporation who make money off of sweatshop products, would like to see more men dead in the street by the hands of police. We rule by the lynchmob."
One of the purveyors of slave product labor said, "You work all your life, and in one night, they come and destroy." He wasn't talking about the dead body of the black man who was shot with machine guns -- he was talking about the windows of his store. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/cameron-on-riots-we-will-not-put-up-with-this/2011/08/10/gIQA9z2O6I_story.html) A $50 to $100 window counts as "destroying a life." Shooting someone with a machine gun, however, doesn't get this reaction. Apparently, that's not a "life" to the Washington Post. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/cameron-on-riots-we-will-not-put-up-with-this/2011/08/10/gIQA9z2O6I_story.html)
The meeting where you organized the speech against the riots was called the "Security Committee." (FT.com) But whose security are you discussing? You're discussing the security of windows and bricks and mortar and capitalist profits and sweatshop products and forced-labor revenues. What about Mark Duggan, the black man who was shot to death with a machine gun by police officers while he sat in the back of a taxi? What about the police officers planting evidence to make it look like Duggan fired at them, which forensics and ballistics have disconfirmed? Security FOR WHO?
There wasn't any security committee when police officers lynched a black man. There wasn't any question of right to life, right to security, right to live free and from the threat of harm when that happened. No, you created riot police, initiated a police state, and clamped down on everything, from public assemblies to freedom of speech, arresting teenagers online for merely discussing the riot. (BBC.co.uk)
Have you arrested the police officers involved in the killing of Mark Duggan? No. Have you shut down the special police unit that killed Mark Duggan, which has been openly admitted to specifically targeting the poor and black neighborhoods of London? No. Have you set up an inquest, an inquiry, a committee of investigation, or anything of that sort? Again, no, no, and no.
So a black man is shot to death by police. And nothing happens within government. Everyone is happy and pleased. Every elected senator, every elected representative, every official, every magistrate, every cop, every detective, every single one of them went to bed happy, pleased, and satisfied in their jobs. But when the common people rise up, firebomb police departments, and set on fire banks, THEN -- THAT'S WHEN YOU CALL IN THE SECURITY COMMITTEE. The only security we need is from governments, police, and the Capitalist system -- in short, we only need security from absolutely everything you represent.