I for one am glad the plan to hold terror suspects for 90 days without
charge did not go through. To hold somebody for 90 days is absurd not to
mention a violation against the human rights of an individual. Surely 14
days is enough to question somebody and find out whether they are a
terrorist or not. We can see the consequences the new terror laws have
had on innocent people (jeans carles denemez) through carless mistakes
made by the police in believeing certain individuals are terrorists . There
is a very interesting article on the gurdian website for those interested on
how the terror bill effects muslims
What are everybodys views on this? Do you think 90 days of holding the
terror suspect without charge should have gone through? Is 14 days to
little to decide whether someone is a terrorist or not. Has Tony Blair taken
one step too far this time? Is he worthy of being Prime minister or has the
country lost respect for him and dont trust him anymore? should he step
down and let somebody else take over?
What was shocking was that 3 out of the 4 Muslim MPs voted FOR the 90 day detention period. Idiots.
Only Sadiq Khan voted AGAINST.
If Blair hasn't resigned in a week's time then he'll resign after his next parliamentary defeat.
I should think there ought to be a fixed compensation if no charge is brought so that it is not in the state's interest to be casual with it. Also an amount of that detention could take place in special cells that provide decent amenities, and not the harsh, 'safe' cells in which petty criminals are kept. I would think that if someone is suspected of such a heinous threat it is inadequate for the law to demand release after 14 days. The exact amount seems pretty arbitrary to me, so if the police say 90 days should do, then, 90 days. If a few considerations such as this weren't covered by the bill then it is right to redraft.
irghan,
It is not as if these measures are for use against all and sundry. Why should Muslim MPs especially take a position against these measures?
Yeah i know its absolutely disgusting to think that there are SOME muslims out there who actually support Tony Blair after everything he has done. There is alot of pressure for Tony Blair to step down but hes digging in his heels and theres no way hes stepping down anytime soon so we gonna have to put up with him for the time being. :evil:
No not the gum drop buttons! – Gingy
the police already have enough powers as it is, by giving them the power to hold suspects for 90 days will lead them to abuse that power (it has been known to happen) and use it in ways which the law doesnt allow it and theyl become power mad like Tony Blair.
No not the gum drop buttons! – Gingy
Naz,
It is a national security issue, not a partisan game. Opposing Blair on principle would mean overlooking the content of any bill, and that would be a disaster.
yeah i know its a security issue but surely there have to be others ways.
No not the gum drop buttons! – Gingy
The 'anti-terror' lws being passed and debated are being passed and debated in the aftermath of 7/7. 7/7 was carried ut by Muslims. Currently this country faces a terror threat from Muslims. These laws will be used against Muslims.
If future govs decide to use these laws against I don't know... anti-capitalists or Scottish seperatists that's a different issue.
Furthermore, the Muslim community is against the current gov package. As Muslim MPs, and self-declared Muslim leaders, these guys should air the views of the Muslim community. By towing the gov line these guys are dictating to Muslims and not listening to them or representing them.
This is a security issue. But harsh measures will swell terrorist ranks not reduce them.
I acknowledge that it is painful to allow a bill like this to be enacted, since innocent Muslims may suffer under it. I can only suggest measures that make such a detention easier and that offer compensation if suspects are released.
I want tough measures that guard against terrorism - it is fairly inevitable that the threat of terrorism will not simply disappear, and acts of terror being identified and scuppered ever more frequently - and I do not want such measures to compromise the justice we all expect in the UK. If you would like to see alternatives to this bill I propose you get to thinking of some pronto.
With caveats as outlined I think the bill would be fine.
To suggest harsh measures would swell the ranks of terrorists is to suggest that prosecution and punishment causes crime. That would only be the case if a sizeable segment of the public wished to support criminals proactively.
it has been over 120 days since the bombing on 7 July 2005. No charges brought against anybody yet.
None. Nada. Zilch. Diddly squat. nowt.
so when an actual crime has taken place, and no evidence can be found in 120 days, how can evidence be found in 9o days for a crime that has not taken place, that would have not been found under the old system?
If anyone is held, they should be compensated if they are not charged. Even with the upcoming 28 days detention, or the previous 14 days. or even house arrest.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Doesn't work to compensate for each and every little thing. I've been held falsely once, when I was a student, it's one of those things. They need to take you in on what evidence they have before they can establish whether charges should be brought, and if you appreciate the protection they offer you don't object within reason. Hence if the law is extending detention, fixed compensation would need to be built in, it isn't there at present and quite rightly so.
true. but anything more than a few days can cause monetary problems for the individual...
While I would agree with the right for the state to take a person away for questioning, I would also prefer there to be adequate monetary compensatino to the loss of earnings etc...
I have not idea hw the system works... so there may already be something there...
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
money can knock a lot of sense into an individual/organisation...
But the standard stuff is abit too much. tal about paperwor...
and the launch of insurance shemes for those more liely to be arrrested... Now there is a business opportunity!
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
That standard where Muslims MP are concern. They always end up trying to prove they more english na patrotic then the other MP. They never try to represent the community rather themselves. I know I had a cousin who ran for MP this year and he also believed in "We need to support the troop rubbish as well"
"A true Muslim is thankful to Allah in prosperity, and resigned to His will in adversity."
[url=http//www.guidancemedia.com/videostream.php?id=Burda.mov]Quran[/url]
Harsh measures will encourage more extremism.
If innocent people keep getting arrested and heldfor long periods of time then on being released they will harbour a grudge against the authorities and be more suseptible to extremists.
Already innocents are being locked up under existing laws. Only a fraction of the people arrested for terrorist offences are charged with anything.
Harsher laws will mean more victimisation of Muslims.
If it is not done harshly, innocent people are not at risk of becoming evil monsters.
People don't have to become evil monsters in order to blow others up.
You wouldn't call the IDF evil monsters, would you?
It can sometimes take very little to make people dramatically alter their world-view.
Very true, I wouldn't call the IDF evil monsters, they are misrepresented, portrayed as having a villainous streak. They are an upstanding army that defends a country besieged by terrorism. I suppose you are correct, that terrorists are humans, not monsters, but in fact their operations are those that cause maximum death and destruction among civilians. I don't think detaining people on suspicion of terrorism can induce that sort of behaviour. Since we are talking about, on the one hand, a localised war between the Israelis and the Arab terrorists, and on the other, the detention in Britain of terrorists, the comparison is a crude one.
OK... Much like internment failed in Northern Ireland and boosted Republican militants I suspect the same would happen here with Muslim extremists.
Best leave 'em alone then.
No.
Best deal with them approprietly.
This idea of compensation being fixed into the system for longer periods of detention if introduced will only mean tax payers will have to pay more in order to compensate individuals who turn out not be terriosts. Surely we pay enough taxes as it is. I dont think you get paid if you spend a certain amount of time in a police station for questioning, ie lost of earnings however you would if doing jury service.
No not the gum drop buttons! – Gingy
hmmm... 3 out of the four MP's are MupPets...
Do I have three turkeys of the year?
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Naz, whether we pay enough tax is irrelevant.
irfghan, appropriately meaning what?
Something not harsh and arbitrary.
irfghan,
That isn't measurable, 'not harsh and arbitrary'. 14 days is soft and arbitrary. I should think unless someone's in denial about a serious weight of evidence they wouldn't make it harsh, and the police have suggested they would benefit from holding terror suspects for up to 90 days. It seems perfectly reasonable if they are willing to offer some fixed compensation to wrongfully arrested suspects held for that long.
Hundreds of people are being arrested and held under existing laws as it is.
Any tightening of the law will only ensnare more innocent people.
If anything police need to improve their investigative procedures. One or two of the 7/7 bombers were reported to the police by their local mosque. But the police did nothing.
"Hundreds of people are being arrested and held under existing laws as it is."
Very good, unless you mean [i]hundreds[/i] of [i]innocent[/i] people have been held for the whole 14 days. Can you verify that? Otherwise it's a very good thing. The point about police needing to improve investigative proceedures might also be valid. They say it would take more time, or terrorists will be able to kill many people upon release even after 14 days' detention.
I meant hundreds of innocent people are being arrested and held under existing laws. But I think few if any people have been held for the full 14 days.
I don't see any reason to increase to 90 days if few if any people have been held for 14 days. Unless ofcourse one of the 7/7 / 21/7 bombers/plotters was held for 14 days but then had to be released.
irghan, your arguments seem to contradict one another - which is it, too many arrests or too few? The police don't resort to torture and the like. Especially if few people are detained for the maximum time, it is no big deal to arrest and release innocents, or at least people who evidently won't be charged. For the police it is frustrating that with limited resources and only 14 days to gather evidence they often have to release key suspects. For most crimes they have around a day to come up with charges, and they have the frustration of letting likely criminals loose daily. It isn't a risk they want to take with terror suspects. btw can you verify your statistics?
Pages