House Arrest

So, what do these three men have in common:

[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]

Answer: They all think that House Arrest is a convenient way of dealing with people you don't like the look of, but whom you happen not to have hard evidence against.

This country is beginning to scare me.

EDIT

Here's a link:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4211127.stm

[STONEISLAND]

Chris you will have no worries there. As far as I'm concerned there's no smoke with out fire. I think its a good idea and the only people who has to worry is the people involved with terrisum (spellt wrong) I have no fear whats so ever as I'm sure YOU dont being honest.

Oh and the other 2 are dictators the 1 in the middle is not.

[Graham F]

What would you think is better then Chris?

To be honest I thought the laws we had were good, as all those held were/are free to leave the country at anytime. I do agree I think these new powers which apply to British Nationals as well are worrying, but what option were they left with? The Security services can only watch so many people at once.

[philip.j.fry]

The photo on the BBC site is pretty apt, very Big Brotheresque.

Originally Posted by Graham F

What would you think is better then Chris?

To be honest I thought the laws we had were good, as all those held were/are free to leave the country at anytime. I do agree I think these new powers which apply to British Nationals as well are worrying, but what option were they left with? The Security services can only watch so many people at once.

Well, I think the 'security assurances' the UK has made to the US almost certainly amount to each of the Guantanamo Four having their own personal Spook for the forseeable future. They are going to have to endure re-sealed envelopes and quiet breathing in the background on their phone lines. Even this makes me uncomfortable but at least those men will be free unless and until they are actually proven to have done something wrong.

The detention of foreigners suspected of terrorism actually bothered me slightly less, because they were not UK nationals and I think we as a nation should have the right to remove foreigners from the country by revoking whatever visa they had to be here in the first place, and I think when considering visas it is reasonable to proceed on the grounds of suspicion, as you can't take every visa case to Court. Let's not forget, they had the right to leave jail at any time, by leaving the UK at the same time. Still not something I was comfortable with, but something I was ok about living with for a limited time under extreme circumstances.

This, however, is very different. These powers would have allowed the Guildford Four and the Birmingham Six to be detained under house arrest, indefinitely. The police would not even have needed to bother fitting them up for the crimes. We are returning to the bad old days of internment and it is utterly inexcuseable.

The thing that scares me is that pronouncements from Blair and others about our very nation being at stake are sounding increasingly hollow. We are asked to trust Blair and Clarke because they say we should, on the basis of information they say they have seen, but which we are forbidden from seeing and evaluating ourselves for security reasons. How very convenient for them.

I think that all the money we are wasting pursuing illegal legislation, and designing an ID card scheme that will never work, should be spent on improving and expanding MI5. That way, we might actually get the evidence we need to nail some of these people under the laws we already have, and which have served us well for years.

Originally Posted by skunk4u

As far as I'm concerned there's no smoke with out fire.

Then perhaps you would care to pull your head out of the sand and pay attention to the myriad miscarriages of justice that have plagued the courts over the years. Between politicians scrabbling for votes, the paranoia of the press and the closed-minded attitude of certain segments of the population of this country they've managed to come up with a most impressive magic-smoke machine.

Sorry, I couldn'r resist playing with this:

[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]

I think he makes a very convincing tinpot dictator myself.

[Graham F]

Those laws might of served us well in dealing with the threats we have had in the past. However how many of the terrorists these laws worked against would consider sucide bombings? or the mass killing of people like 9/11? These are extreme people and extreme measures are needed to deal with them. Unless someone can come up with a better solution that doesn't discriminate against foreigners this seems the only logical step, as the British people would not stand for British nationals being locked up in prision without charge. So the house arrest system seems the only way forward.

Its not nice, but it is a way of dealing with the threat!

What gets me, are organisations like Liberty saying this is outragous keeping these people locked up, but they never give an alternative way of dealing with it. Saying the law is no good, isn't good enough what we need are other ways of dealing with the threat!

Do people think the 'threat' is real or do you think it is overstated by Government?

[STONEISLAND]

Originally Posted by dr wadd

Then perhaps you would care to pull your head out of the sand and pay attention to the myriad miscarriages of justice that have plagued the courts over the years.

My head is well out of the sand I'm a news addict as you can see from some of my threads. Are we talking miscarriages of justice on terror of normal offences? I'm talking terror as the thread is mainly about terror. You do not see many cases of miscarriages of justice on terror suspects.

Originally Posted by dr wadd

Between politicians scrabbling for votes, the paranoia of the press and the closed-minded attitude of certain segments of the population of this country they've managed to come up with a most impressive magic-smoke machine.

Smoke screen for what? At the end of the day surly they are doing it for mine and your safty. I'm not scared by the govoment as what seems you are?
__________________

Originally Posted by Chris T

Sorry, I couldn'r resist playing with this:



I think he makes a very convincing tinpot dictator myself.

Very good But wrong Is he evil? I think not.

the whole thing is a joke. House arrest? pffftttttt doesnt stop them ploting as opposed to doing.

[Graham F]

it does stop them planning as well, as there would be restrictions on phone adn internet access and i'm sure that those under house arrest would be closely monitored

Originally Posted by Graham F

Those laws might of served us well in dealing with the threats we have had in the past. However how many of the terrorists these laws worked against would consider sucide bombings? or the mass killing of people like 9/11? These are extreme people and extreme measures are needed to deal with them. Unless someone can come up with a better solution that doesn't discriminate against foreigners this seems the only logical step, as the British people would not stand for British nationals being locked up in prision without charge. So the house arrest system seems the only way forward.

Its not nice, but it is a way of dealing with the threat!

What gets me, are organisations like Liberty saying this is outragous keeping these people locked up, but they never give an alternative way of dealing with it. Saying the law is no good, isn't good enough what we need are other ways of dealing with the threat!

Do people think the 'threat' is real or do you think it is overstated by Government?

The terrorist attacks of September 2001 were of an extreme kind. They took an age to plan and prepare and they cost a fortune to execute. They relied also on extremely lax security on the part of US domestic airlines. The chances of anything that severe happening again in our lifetime are, I would say, remote.

What confuses me is that we lived with the IRA threat for 30 years and at no time did we start throwing away our liberties in the way we are doing now - except for that disastrous experiment in internment whose results are there for all to see. Yet the Troubles in Northern Ireland resulted in some 3,468 deaths between 1969 and 1998 (source). That is equivalent to those who died in New York and Washington, and a mere drop in the ocean compared to WWII, which, in my opinion, is the last time this country faced an emergency severe enough to justify draconian powers such as those now being contemplated.

The High Court ruled the detention of foreign nationals was 'grossly disproportionate' to the threat, and I see no reason to view house arrest as less disproportionate. Detention is detention, denial of liberty, whether it's in your front room or a prison cell.

And yes, I think the current theat is being grossly overstated for the purposes of political advancement. It makes me sick and with the spineless Tories apparently happy to go along with it, I am now very seriously thinking about voting Lib Dem and taking my chances on beating them in a referendum on their loony ideas about Europe. And coming from me, believe me, that is a seismic shift in personal politics.

Originally Posted by Graham F

it does stop them planning as well, as there would be restrictions on phone adn internet access and i'm sure that those under house arrest would be closely monitored

oh right, and they are the only ways to communicate?

[Graham F]

Originally Posted by Chris T

The terrorist attacks of September 2001 were of an extreme kind. They took an age to plan and prepare and they cost a fortune to execute. They relied also on extremely lax security on the part of US domestic airlines. The chances of anything that severe happening again in our lifetime are, I would say, remote.

What confuses me is that we lived with the IRA threat for 30 years and at no time did we start throwing away our liberties in the way we are doing now - except for that disastrous experiment in internment whose results are there for all to see. Yet the Troubles in Northern Ireland resulted in some 3,468 deaths between 1969 and 1998 (source). That is equivalent to those who died in New York and Washington, and a mere drop in the ocean compared to WWII, which, in my opinion, is the last time this country faced an emergency severe enough to justify draconian powers such as those now being contemplated.

The High Court ruled the detention of foreign nationals was 'grossly disproportionate' to the threat, and I see no reason to view house arrest as less disproportionate. Detention is detention, denial of liberty, whether it's in your front room or a prison cell.

And yes, I think the current theat is being grossly overstated for the purposes of political advancement. It makes me sick and with the spineless Tories apparently happy to go along with it, I am now very seriously thinking about voting Lib Dem and taking my chances on beating them in a referendum on their loony ideas about Europe. And coming from me, believe me, that is a seismic shift in personal politics.

Then you look at the Madrid train bombings though Chris over 200 people killed, this is a new kind of terror threat, they want to kill as many people as possible and don't give a damn what who or how. The Northen Ireland issue was different as alot of the attacks were against the security forces or to inflict damage to property. (please don't get me wrong here any kind of loss of live is terrible regards of who it is) Now the goal posts have moved they want to kill as many as possible regardless of job, race, age, gender.

During the 70's, 80's and 90's all the security was based around army bases, police stations, and busy centres. Where as now they are showing a will to strike against 'soft' targets with NO warning, I find this more terrifying than anything else.

Do I think the threat to us here and now is overstated, no i don't. The 'new breed' of terriorist are extreme and very difficult to deal with. While the High Court ruled the detention 'grossly disproportionate' they did not say it was illegal (correct if i am wrong), which is why it ended up going to the Law Lords who deemed it unlawful, strangley enough the Government do not have to abide by any ruling from the law lords (hence they have not been released) where as if the High Court said it was unlawful they would have to (again I might be worng on that, am doing this from memory).
__________________

Originally Posted by gary_580

oh right, and they are the only ways to communicate?

Such as letter, face to face, all of which would be monitored, how do you think they would plan things?

Originally Posted by Graham F

Such as letter, face to face, all of which would be monitored, how do you think they would plan things?

Theyre not in solitary confinement