UK Citizens to be held without trial

[rynnor]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4210685.stm

I did wonder what the government would do after detaining foreign nationals indefinately without trial was found to be discriminatory but I never really believed that they would go so far...

The so called 'war on terror' is a bloody convenient excuse to trample over the rights of the individual. Does anyone else find the prospect of the Home Office minister picking fellow citizens at his own whim to be detained without any evidence or any right to a trial a bit scary?

I think its particularly telling that the government didnt decide to make the phone records admissable in court - the most likely interpretation's I make from that is that the phone records were either A - completely innocuous and unconvincing or B - completely made up!

The most fundamental civil liberty is the right to Liberty! This isnt just a case to worry the lefty liberals - everyone should be concerned by this.

 

[throdgrain]

Bollocks.

 

[leggy]

Bollocks.

A useful and thought provoking post all round really

 

[throdgrain]

Pertinent, I like to call it

 

[Danya]

The so called 'war on terror' is a bloody convenient excuse to trample over the rights of the individual.

Works for Bush, so I guess Blair is trying to get in on the act as it were.

 

[Milkshake]

No offence, but there is no, no, no reason why the US government would hold these people for so long if they didn't have any proof that they were up to no good.

I don't care what you fucking conspiracists think... I honestly feel our government are doing the best they can to keep us safe.

Personally, I don't want people to wait for some sort of massive tragedy on the UK shores to show everyone that it's not a nice place out there. Not everyone is a fluffy bunny. There are people out there that want to kill every single UK citizen, you and me.

Fucking media. Liberty and stuff? Great. But just because the general public doesn't know what these four criminals have done, does not mean they have not done anything.

Why is everyone so fucking naive?

 

[nath]

Why is everyone so fucking naive?

You're quite right, the government wouldn't get it wrong, and sure if they indefinetly detain the odd innocent man it's worth it given the imment threat of terrists and danger and bombs and awful nasty things!

 

[Turamber]

Liberty and freedom are said to be the cornerstones of our western society. If the acts of a few terrorists can cause our governments to abandon these standards then who, really, has won?

Here's a clue in case you are too naive to understand the principles involved ... it's not the west.

 

[Paradroid]

No offence, but there is no, no, no reason why the US government would hold these people for so long if they didn't have any proof that they were up to no good.

I don't care what you fucking conspiracists think... I honestly feel our government are doing the best they can to keep us safe.

Personally, I don't want people to wait for some sort of massive tragedy on the UK shores to show everyone that it's not a nice place out there. Not everyone is a fluffy bunny. There are people out there that want to kill every single UK citizen, you and me.

Fucking media. Liberty and stuff? Great. But just because the general public doesn't know what these four criminals have done, does not mean they have not done anything.

Why is everyone so fucking naive?

LOL, comedy gold.

Why are people so fucking naive?

hmm?

 

[throdgrain]

As you may have guessed from my previous comment, I have no problem with it at all. We need more powers to stop terrorists, or potential terrorists, and if nescessary eject them from this country. Abu Hanza? Chuck them the fuck out.

 

[Louster]

No offence, but there is no, no, no reason why the US government would hold these people for so long if they didn't have any proof that they were up to no good.

Funny, that's not what most people think. Do you not know anything about Guantanamo Bay? The whole point is that, if they actually HAD proof of the detainee's "being up to no good", they wouldn't even be there.

Also, it's convenient that you can apply the idea that "not everyone is a fluffy bunny" to "foreigners" but not "politicians".

 

[Vae]

No offence, but there is no, no, no reason why the US government would hold these people for so long if they didn't have any proof that they were up to no good.

I don't care what you fucking conspiracists think... I honestly feel our government are doing the best they can to keep us safe.

Personally, I don't want people to wait for some sort of massive tragedy on the UK shores to show everyone that it's not a nice place out there. Not everyone is a fluffy bunny. There are people out there that want to kill every single UK citizen, you and me.

Fucking media. Liberty and stuff? Great. But just because the general public doesn't know what these four criminals have done, does not mean they have not done anything.

Why is everyone so fucking naive?

a) They are not criminals until proven guilty of a criminal offence.

b) The US has hidden in the grey area claiming they are enemy combatants and thus not entitled to either the civil laws protection or the Geneva convention and that is an absolute discrace from a country that prides itself on individual freedoms. It especially strikes a chord here in the UK where we are used to the protection of habeas corpus. The fact our civil liberties are being subsumed beneath a culture of fear is the top of the slippery slope towards a police state. In effect the terrorists are already winning by causing us to suspend the liberties that we supposedly stand for.

Now Charles Clarke is currently proposing laws that mean the government could lock up anyone with recourse to the police, the courts or anyone. The courts are there as a check against the government become a dictatorship for the same reason that we have a police force and the army don't enforce the laws.

c) I believe the "Why is everyone so fucking naive?" quote is equally applicable to you in that you seem to believe that the government (either US or UK) couldn't be wrong about this. Look at the US now and you see the power is becoming increasingly concentrated and it has become more right wing with the subsequent effect on individual liberties and freedoms.

I think you'd be gravely mistaken to believe either view on this. The truth lies somewhere between the conspiracy theorists and those who naively believe the government must be right (they've been wrong about so many other things I don't know how anyone could even start to take this view). People should question what the government and the media tell them a lot more and concentrate on the facts not what the opinions are.

As Jefferson said - "The tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of patriots and traitors every ten years" - This shouldn't be taken literally but his point is that we shouldn't give up our freedoms and will have to fight for them every so often.

Quid custodit ipsos custodes?

 

[Milkshake]

Hey, i'm not trying to be funny

But honestly... do you honestly reckon that these people were just picked up randomly so as to show that things were being done to "tackle terrorism"?

You're quite right, the government wouldn't get it wrong, and sure if they indefinetly detain the odd innocent man it's worth it given the imment threat of terrists and danger and bombs and awful nasty things!

So we gotta wait for 10,000 to die before we take this seriously huh? And who said these guys are innocent? Why detain them if they were not?

Liberty and freedom are said to be the cornerstones of our western society. If the acts of a few terrorists can cause our governments to abandon these standards then who, really, has won?

Last time I looked, we were a democracy, and we got to vote for our leaders. Freedom does not mean that everyone can do as they please, to hijack and bomb and get away with it. Liberty does not mean we turn the other cheek if we see someone doing something to threaten our way of life.

When did we abandon Liberty and Freedom Turamber?

Why is it that just because the Daily Sport says these guys are innocent, everyone takes it on board that they are. Has everyone forgotten the Daily Mail's little photo scam *already*?

 

[Milkshake]

Wow, lots of replies, glad people are thinking about this.

c) I believe the "Why is everyone so fucking naive?" quote is equally applicable to you in that you seem to believe that the government (either US or UK) couldn't be wrong about this.

Why do you assume that the government are already wrong? They've made mistakes before, they'll make em again, but why is it that it's assumed that they are wrong already?

We've got to trust someone. It's difficult to trust the politicians, but what about the Police? The Army? If you can't trust the people who run this country, how can you sleep at night? Does it not drive you insane?

 

[nath]

Absolutely not, we shouldn't trust anyone in power. One should always question those in authority. The assumption isn't that they're wrong, it's that they could be. If they are, some poor sap is stuck without a lawyer or the opportunity to defend himself. As Vae said - innocent til proven guilty has gone out of the window. It's people such as yourself, so willing to accept this being chucked out that keep me awake at night.

 

[Turamber]

When did we abandon Liberty and Freedom Turamber?

The very moment that somebody is imprisoned against their will without their guilt being proved in a court of law.

 

[Milkshake]

They've had lawyers since the start, even in Guatanamo Bay they've had lawyers. I saw an interview with one on Newsnight a while back.

It facinates me though about how you think these people are taken into custody. Do you think they are just picked out of a phone book? Randomly, "ooh, it's his turn this month". Or are months of painstaking work put in to every person, so that a case can be watertight? Phonecalls not admissable in court...holy shit, does that mean they were actually trying to gather evidence?

Why can't we trust anyone in power? There must be some form of trust, otherwise why would anyone vote for that person? Isn't the whole point the fact that you vote for the person that you can trust to do the best for you in power?

Or am I wrong?

 

[~Yuckfou~]

a) They are not criminals until proven guilty of a criminal offence.

Incorrect, they are not convicted criminals until proven guilty. If I kill someone and I don't get caught I'm still a criminal.



I'm struggling to see how people who want to be British to abuse our benefit and housing system, and who than go and fight against us and our allies can possibly not be guilty. There are only two logical actions, deport them or imprison them. There were bastards still living in this country, giving interviews on the TV with the now obligatory "I want to fight but don't want anyone to know who I am because I'm only brave with a gun in my hand" scaves wrapped around their faces. We knew who they were, we let them back in to our country after the conflict.

I'll make a prediction. In our lifetimes the shit will hit the fan. Tolerance will come to an end. People who have always been accepting are getting pissed off. I'm one of them.

 

[Milkshake]

Also, it's convenient that you can apply the idea that "not everyone is a fluffy bunny" to "foreigners"

I don't remember saying that....aren't they UK nationals anyway, caught over in Afghanistan. Wierd huh? One was a postman. Doesn't mean he's innocent.

 

[throdgrain]

I'll make a prediction. In our lifetimes the shit will hit the fan. Tolerance will come to an end. People who have always been accepting are getting pissed off. I'm one of them.

Sorry to say it, but ditto.

 

[Trem]

I'll make a prediction. In our lifetimes the shit will hit the fan. Tolerance will come to an end. People who have always been accepting are getting pissed off. I'm one of them.

My dad predicted that and so do I.

 

[nath]

Christ, I'd hate to be even remotely middle eastern (even if I was born in peckham) at a time like this.

 

[Paradroid]

As you may have guessed from my previous comment, I have no problem with it at all. We need more powers to stop terrorists, or potential terrorists, and if nescessary eject them from this country. Abu Hanza? Chuck them the fuck out.

Well, lets just hope you're not labelled a terrorist by anyone then.

If fact, I could argue that, by backing such draconian measures, you're terrorising my liberty & freedom, ergo, you're a goddam liberal-rights terrorist! We're trying to bring liberty to the oppressed, to protect people from danger! We want to comfort those who suffer, and bring hope to those who despair! We're trying to defend your freedom and security! You're trying to take away my freedom, that our brave forefathers fought for! You hate our ways and what we stand for! You're the enemy of my freedom! You, terrorist, you!




...oops.

 

[Trem]

Christ, I'd hate to be even remotely middle eastern (even if I was born in peckham) at a time like this.

Well, me old chum, I would hate to be European in the muslim countries right now.

 

[Turamber]

"In Germany they came first for the Communists and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me--and by that time no one was left to speak up. "


- Rev. Martin Niemoller, 1945

 

[nath]

Yeah, it's much worse out there so it makes all the intolerance and prejudice over here acceptable.

 

[Mofo8]

Ooooohhh.... topical.... 'The Siege' is on ITV2 from 9pm till 11.20pm.

For the people who think the government's proposal is reasonable: Would you be in favour of it if it were extended to other areas of crime or offences? i.e. Would you be happy if the government started taking people's driving licences away because it was suspected they might commit a speeding offence in the future? Or locking up all single males in their twenties (as statistically they are the group most likely to commit violent crime)?

If someone's done something 'bad', or was planning or conspiring to do something 'bad', then produce the evidence in a court of law. It's a system that's worked remarkably well over the years (with a few notable exceptions).

 

[Trem]

Yeah, it's much worse out there so it makes all the intolerance and prejudice over here acceptable.

Not at all. But do you think they would "tolerate" incidents like this like we do in this country? Would they tolerate someone who is a proven supporter of terrorism against the country that he lives in(Abul Hansa)?

No, they fucking well wouldn't, but as usual we are meant to bend over and take it up the arse.

This isn't racist, I aren't racist, I truly aren't. But come on, don't you ever get the feeling the whole world treats us like the soft touch we are.

Its a fucking joke.

I'm paying for Abul Hanza to appeal against his deportation, so are you, your parents etc. Why the fuck should he have a right to appeal?

He's been shouting his believes from the rooftops for years, do we need anymore proof?

Maybe slightly unrelated but I was on a roll

 

[nath]

Not at all. But do you think they would "tolerate" incidents like this like we do in this country? Would they tolerate someone who is a proven supporter of terrorism against the country that he lives in(Abul Hansa)?

I don't give a toss whether they'd tolerate it or not, it's irrelevant. Also, on the Abu Hansa thing, it's not about tolerating him, it's about innocent until proven guilty. I'm worried about the average Joe who get's locked up because he happens to be middle eastern and the government thinks he's been dealing in terrorist activities. I'm not prepared to allow people like that to get fucked over just so it's easier to lock away the real criminals.

 

[Trem]

Also, on the Abu Hansa thing, it's not about tolerating him, it's about innocent until proven guilty

How fucking obvious does it have to be before you realise that he is guilty. He stands in the streets preaching to young muslims about the stuff hes being accused of.

I can't do this on here. Definately be better down the pub.

I won't fall out with you Nath, you have your thoughts, I have mine.

This ain't the place for this type of discussion.