The London / UK riot is neither the first nor the last social side-slip.

I don’t even dare thinking at the causes that drove to this crisis, but I’d take a chance looking at the implications of the measures UK prime minister is considering: cutting the lines.

Blackberry’s Messenger – BBM and Twitter seem to be the main cords that connect all the potential looters together. Cutting these cords may block the signaling, but that’d also be a sign that the government is missing the point. I don’t say it’s inefficient, I say it’s against any governance goals.

“Cutting the lines” only makes sense in a prison, or in a war, where the goal is crushing the enemy. When at war, you know that enemy’s communication channels can only be used against you.

When you’re a prime minister and talk about cutting the communications, then you automatically put yourself in the “enemy” posture; you feel like you’re at war but, “thanks God”, in control of the communication; therefore you cut the lines and let “the enemy” into dark. That’s wrong-thinking. Your people are no enemies.

I won’t say a word on the causes of the UK recent events; I can say, though, that for sure this shouldn’t be seen as a war between government and people. The government should never be entitled to consider itself at war but always against some external enemies. For a government, “internal enemies” should be a nonsense.

The communication channels should never be at a government disposal, unless the entire nation is at war. I’m quite sure David Cameron thought of this riot as if London is bleeding, and turning off BBM and Twitter would be like a tourniquet. But it’s not a tourniquet; it’s losing everybody’s trust in efficient communication in social crisis.

For the sake of humanity, it’s unacceptable to dispose of the communication channels of a nation, especially when you’re the government. These channels have to remain untouched, secure and independent of any social or political goals. That’s sanity.

Let’s say this is not UK, and the rioters are not mad young looters; let’s say this is Libya, and the rioters are Libyan people fighting for their lives. Would you agree with lines-cutting decision? How do you know who’s right and who’s wrong?

Not only should a government permit free speech, but it should be forbidden to not-permit free speech.