News Abu Qatada wins appeal against deportation

[Scouse]

That's a bit of a assumption, Scouse very well might

Seriously - it is a worrying assumption. He's never been accused of killing people - just ideological support of people who kill. But then Britain ideologically supports our armed forces ("heroes" my arse) - and I don't see the distinction between us murdering people and "terrorists" murdering people as important in any way.

If there was a big red button with "press to destroy capitalism, will kill 20,000,000 people at random" on it, I think I'd hit it...

Hypocritical? Probably...

 

[old.Tohtori]

Yeah that's what i meant, assuming someone will murder people is always bad. Anyone is capable of murder and i do dare say anyone, given the circumstances are right etc.

 

[Uncle Sick]

After a thinky through, yes, some level of torture is ok if there is enough proof to validate it. This means jail level proof of knowledge that would lead to avoiding a major bombstrike etc, not a suspicious looking beardyfella who dined with osama on 1997.

The level of proof and the level of torture is ofcourse debatable.

As said though, regulating it would be a pain in the ass and the torture should be taped to allow scrutiny, with direct guidelines etc.

Torture is ok. Regulating islamo-facist symbolism is not.


Okay.

 

[Deebs]

Scouse you're such a wimp. Deport the twat for having an offensive beard. To anywhere, preferrably somewhere that does do torture. Cheers , BYYEE!

Brussels? Send him to the EU. Fucking hate them, the sooner we have the ability to vote on should we stay or go in the EU, the sooner I get to vote NO. Fuckoff.

 

[throdgrain]

Brussels? Send him to the EU. Fucking hate them, the sooner we have the ability to vote on should we stay or go in the EU, the sooner I get to vote NO. Fuckoff.

Damn straight.

 

[Lamp]

We can't deport him, but, well...accidents can happen...

 

[Deebs]

Seriously I fucking hate Europe and all of it's silly fucking laws. When I was in school learning about Great Britain/United Kingdom I learnt that we shaped the world into what it is today, our inventors, our laws, our views. Today we seem to be a fucking puppet to a blind committee. Bring back the pride of the UK, stand alone and make a mark. We can do it again. Finally show me a country that has made such an impact on the evolution of the world today above the UK. Thank you.

 

[Lamp]

The problem is today's politicians have no backbone. We'd probably roll over and give the Falklands back to the Argies...(we don't even have a navy anymore

)

 

[Deebs]

The problem is today's politicians have no backbone. We'd probably roll over and give the Falklands back to the Argies...(we don't even have a navy anymore

)

Don't worry, we are still capable due to our subs (that is about it tho)

 

[soze]

The problem is today's politicians have no backbone. We'd probably roll over and give the Falklands back to the Argies...(we don't even have a navy anymore

)

We will not give it back if there is Oil there worth having. But yeah if they say we cant send them home we should drug them and ship them Royal Mail 2nd class to the ECoHR and let them sort them out.

 

[Job]

I think Britain shaped the world because it's so cold and rainy, we just sat in thinking shit.

 

[throdgrain]

Seriously I fucking hate Europe and all of it's silly fucking laws. When I was in school learning about Great Britain/United Kingdom I learnt that we shaped the world into what it is today, our inventors, our laws, our views. Today we seem to be a fucking puppet to a blind committee. Bring back the pride of the UK, stand alone and make a mark. We can do it again. Finally show me a country that has made such an impact on the evolution of the world today above the UK. Thank you.

I seriously think there are many many people who think like this, but are subdued into silence by the whole PC mechanism.

 

[ECA]

I really despise the EU - and the whole "European Project" to turn us into a united states of europe to counterbalance US/russian/chinese influence.

But seriously, the guy hasn't been convicted of anything we can throw him in jail for and we shouldn't deport people to countries that will torture them.
Charge him, convict him or let him go about his fucking business.

The rule of law, due process and all that good shit.
We shouldn't lock people up just because we THINK they might be bad people.

 

[Deebs]

I seriously think there are many many people who think like this, but are subdued into silence by the whole PC mechanism.

Do you? We did change the world and history proves that. Can we do it again? I think we can, most of the intelligence of the world comes out of the UK.

 

[throdgrain]

It does, but it's diluted by a mad sense of right and wrong that has got out of all proportion. It's the fair play thing, gone fucking metal. There's another thread here at the moment, where people are saying, roughly, we have nukes, so why shouldn't people who hate us have nukes too? It's only fair ...

Fuck them I say, if you want to hurt me and mine, we have to sort you out

The European human rights thing seems to me to be so utterly, fucking OBVIOUSLY mental, yet there are plenty of people ready to defend it. We complain about our countryside being ruined by house and road building, about our massively overstretched National Health, yet we still allow immigrants in the hundreds of thousands, then build houses for some of them, give them free health services, and pay them when they dont have a job. Then they work cash in hand for their brother in law.

Do I blame the immigrants? No. If I live in fucking Afghanistan and I heard about a place with all this stuff going on for free I'd be off there like a shot. No, I blame us for putting up with it. Because we think it's fair.

We arent allowed to defend ourselves, if we do, we get in bigger trouble than the original assailant. We just have to lie down and take it. Over and over again. And there will always be some nob jockeys to support the idea. Fair play old boy, dontcha know.

Frankly, I suspect we are fucked

 

[Ctuchik]

Could argue that torture is fine, if done in reasonable amount(to avoid forced confessions) and if done only with enough proof.

So what is a "reasonable amount" according to you then? And how do you determine when to much force is used or not?

For example, i can force my ex girlfriend to admit under oath to being a necrophiliac just by pulling her hair slightly.

And as i personally didn't use any force worth mentioning, does that confession make it alright to use in court then?

And how would you know the person you torture isn't faking it when he/she starts screaming in pain?

Using torture as a means to an end, in this case getting a confession, is never EVER going to be completely reliable.

Torture is only "reliable" as a punishment, and for the sickos out there, sexual arousal...

One thing about capital punishment being wrong is the possibility of innocence and the lack of undeniable proof in some cases.

But torture is fine if done "in moderation"?


Really?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Torture is ok. Regulating islamo-facist symbolism is not.

Okay.

Whatever helps you sleep at night, not what i said though, on either subject.

Ctuchik, as i said, regulating it would be difficult. I'm in no place to come up with such system, so won't bother coming up with one.

Capital punishment ends lives, no comparison.

You two sure know how to twist words to fit your little crusades

 

[Ctuchik]

Ctuchik, as i said, regulating it would be difficult. I'm in no place to come up with such system, so won't bother coming up with one.

And yet you still think it's an ok method to use?

You advocate torture as a viable interrogation method but you can't be arsed to even think about the possible effects it may have....

You claim torture doesn't end lives, not in and of itself no. But you have to take suicide in to account on this so it's still a cause of death.

 

[Uncle Sick]

Whatever helps you sleep at night, not what i said though, on either subject.

Ctuchik, as i said, regulating it would be difficult. I'm in no place to come up with such system, so won't bother coming up with one.

Capital punishment ends lives, no comparison.

You two sure know how to twist words to fit your little crusades

You didn't say it... in these exact words? I clearly remember arguing my burka point with you ad nauseam and all I got from you
was (not in these exact words, ho-hum) that I'm some sort of fascist because I applauded France's initiative to ban the burka
on the grounds of it being the symbol for an oppressive belief system.

Unlike you, though, I don't condone torture at all. Not even torture-light.

The issue is, that your statements are always wishy washy enough to be willfully misconstrued by yourself if you get a response
you don't agree with. You shouldn't get your panties in a bunch if and when people have a hard time deciphering your yesnomaybe
word constructs.

 

[old.Tohtori]

And yet you still think it's an ok method to use?

You advocate torture as a viable interrogation method but you can't be arsed to even think about the possible effects it may have....

You claim torture doesn't end lives, not in and of itself no. But you have to take suicide in to account on this so it's still a cause of death.

I don't advocate it, i gave my personal opinion on it. I'm not trying to force people into it, or even tell that other people are stoopid for not thinking so. I also pointed out possible flaws in it.

Is it so hard to understand that an opinion is not advocating and rallying for something? You can have an opinion on the matter without deep personal and philosophical roots in it.

Uncle Sick, again, "not exact words" is your problem. You understanding something as X doesn't make it X. I don't get my panties in a bunch, you on the other hand have severe issues regarding any opinion i hold. There's no yesnomaybe in it, if you need a simpler version of the opinion because of a reading disability, here it is;

If it could be regulated and controlled, torture towards people who are proven to be involved in a public dangering activity is fine.

Now argue that, and leave the dotwanking and at the door. Or, alternatively, f*ck off as i won't answer any more of these ridicilous comments.

Oh and one last caveat; leave other thread issues in other threads you muppet.

 

[Job]

It's down now, but the Texas death row page was just epic, I couldn't finsd a single person who didn't deserve the death penalty mixed in with six months of medieval torture for a starter.
The most numb fuckingly sadistic pointless gut wrenching killings for the simple disturbed pleasure of it...everyone of them.
Like tying up 18 year olds in a McDonalds, including a pregnat girl, locking them in the freezer, stealing the money then opening the door and shooting each one in the head before getting caught walking out the door.

 

[old.Tohtori]

It's down now, bu tthe Texas death row page was just epic,I coudldn't finsd a single person who didn't deserve the death penalty mixed in with six months of medieval torture for a starter.
The most numb fuckingly sadistic pointless gut wrenching killings for the simple disturbed pleasure of it...everyone of them.
Like tieing up 18 year olds in a McDonalds,including a pregnat girl, locking them in the freezer, stealing the money then opening the door at shooting each one in the head before getting caught walking out the door.

That is stupid, should've used the backdoor.

And so should've the thief

 

[Scouse]

Whilst I agree with you on your stance on torture (and your stance against toht), this:

I'm some sort of fascist because I applauded France's initiative to ban the burka

Yes. Yes you are

...I couldn't finsd a single person who didn't deserve the death penalty mixed in with six months of medieval torture for a starter.

We ditched the death penalty in the UK because, amongst other reasons, we can't be sure of the security of our prosecutions. And science has shown that people who perform torture become "corrupted" by the act and are much more likely to be violent towards other humans in the future...

 

[old.Tohtori]

And i do think i didn't call Sick a fascist, hypocrit perhaps, silly? I dunno, but certainly not that.

I didn't even comment on his approval of french banning.

Interesting how everyone puts people in this camp and that camp, where all of the opinions in that camp are of one voice and against MY singular opinions in this camp

 

[Scouse]

Toht, if it's a subject you don't feel strongly enough to be on either side of, have you considered not posting about it?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Toht, if it's a subject you don't feel strongly enough to be on either side of, have you considered not posting about it?

Are you saying that people should only discuss matters they have strong opinions on, so that they can be either for or against you, with no middleground?

 

[caLLous]

You can't say "torture's ok" (it doesn't matter that you said "with moderation" or whatever, it's still a ridiculous idea) and then say "but I cba to think about how it would work".

 

[old.Tohtori]

I said i won't bother coming up with the system for regulated torture, not that i don't accept that it would have problems. I even said it would.

And it DOES matter in what context things are said.

Also callous, in the context, you ignored completely the part about proof. You torturing your GF is irrelevant and you don't have such rights anyway.

 

[Job]

LOL if it's a war, we're winning by about a million to one.
Western secularism is eating away in the mind of every Muslim right now, the Churches and the Mosques are emptying and it is just the thrashing of a dying snake.
The clothes will go, the accents will be replaced by local one's and the medieval beliefs will be exposed for the bolox they are, the rich will hold up the facade for the benefit of the neighbours, much like we do and then it wil all fade away until some other stories pop up in a few hundred years time.

 

[Scouse]

Are you saying that people should only discuss matters they have strong opinions on, so that they can be either for or against you, with no middleground?

No toht. I'm saying stop talking for talking's sake.