Will a high up army officer order his men to attack British citizens on the orders of the PM or will he think - something wrong here and order a military uprising.
The British military do not swear allegiance to the state but to the crown
That's a good point, Martin. I sadly think civil disorder is becoming increasingly likely and I suspect fear of that lies behind the reason that this bill is being introduced. I would further suspect HM forces to be exactly that...loyal to HM, not to PM. 
I think we all know that when military force is used for the furtherance of civil aims the situation rapidly runs out of control.
There is little chance of any form of military intervention in the governance of this country - the numbers are simply not there
I bow to your superior knowledge, Zulu, but I'm not convinced that an attempt would not be made. 
The frame work to support such a notion has already been assembled but this has its foundations in the civil application of public order control.
The infrastructure to collate and disseminate information concerning those considered to be a threat to the state is now mostly in place.
I would envisage that it will make the Stasi model upon which it was designed - lust for information on movements, intrusive legislation affecting personal freedom, control of media, lack any realistic prospect for objections to be heard and fairly assessed and so on - pale into insignificance.
The Proscriptive State will not require military muscle to quell unrest as there has been more than a sufficient number of toadies, agents and those determined to be on the side of provision and power recruited in the recent past to enable the state to function at will.
Author
Topic: Civil Contingencies Bill (Read 787 times)