Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Graham
What some people in here and the Home Office Minister seem to be arguing is that those who *are* stopped and searched should be *happy* to be so, "just in case", *because* it will "prevent terrorism".
|
Noone should be happy about it, but people should be reasonable about it. If someone reported a rape by a large man, dark hair, long beard, blue jeans and white t-shirt, and I happened to be walking in the area at the time, not long after, i'd understand why I was questioned. I wouldn't like it, but I wouldn't bleat that it was against my civil rights, that I was prejudiced, etc.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Graham
Yes, you use *intelligence* (which could be *supplied* by the innocent members of the Muslim community who may have suspicions of one of their members) to investigate that person.
Of course if you've ******ed off the members of that community by treating them *all* as potential terrorists, some who may have come forward might, instead say "to hell with them".
|
So if we agree that inside informants (Like Ramrod said) is extremely unlikely, we have to rely on intelligence. Is that the same intelligence you claim is gathered against our civil rights?