Yesterdays vote against Tony Blair

[LeazesMag 0]

biggest disgrace in living memory.

 

Tories have put party politics before the good of the country.

 

So much for the party of law and order.

 

Stand by for terrorists being released due to security services being unable to find the evidence necessary to nail this scum within the 28 day period.

 

For those who think such animals have "rights", don't be shocked or put on shock reaction and disgust, when the next explosion goes off somewhere.

Edited November 11, 2005 by LeazesMag

[peasepud 59]

Im hummin n harrrin on this one...

 

Im all for anything that stops terrorism, so as far as Im concerned 90 days, 180 days whatever it takes is fine, what does confuse me is the need for it? surely, if the security services have enough reason to believe that the suspect is involved in terrorism then they can pull together enough of a case to charge them???

[Craig 6707]

Why do they need 90 days to nail someone in 2005??

 

Or are they suggesting that the intelligent services are not as competent these days?

 

If they need more than 28 days to get proof, then something's not right! The vote was totally the correct decision.

[Guest alex]

I think everybody apart from a very small minority is totally against any terrorist attacks on the general public in this country. However, I honestly don't think a civilised country in the 21st Century should be able to detain people for 90 days without charge. I'm sorry but if you can't even charge an individual after 28 days I don't see what difference another 62 days is going to make. If there's still nothing to charge the person with after that period you wouyld have to release them anyway. I thought the vote was a victory for democracy.

[Renton 22759]

biggest disgrace in living memory.

 

Tories have put party politics before the good of the country.

 

So much for the party of law and order.

 

Stand by for terrorists being released due to security services being unable to find the evidence necessary to nail this scum within the 28 day period.

 

For those who think such animals have "rights", don't be shocked or put on shock reaction and disgust, when the next explosion goes off somewhere.

55113[/snapback]

 

 

What a load of bollocks, especially the last sentence. How would the new 90 day law have prevented the London bombings or 9/11? Or any other terrorist attack in history for that matter?

 

Are you seriously telling me that it is likely a terrorist will be picked up and questioned for a whole 28 days, then released because the police had insufficient evidence against them, and go on to commit a terrorist act? They would be under constant surveillance until the police could actually do their job and charge them.

 

Blair said after 9/11 that terrorists would never change our way of life, yet he has gone on to do exactly that. He is exploiting a fear of terrorism which is completely disproportionate to the real threat, and using this as a lever to erode democracy. The only winners here are the terrorists themselves. I'm no tory, but they were spot on in this case imo.

[manc-mag 1]

I think everybody apart from a very small minority is totally against any terrorist attacks on the general public in this country. However, I honestly don't think a civilised country in the 21st Century should be able to detain people for 90 days without charge. I'm sorry but if you can't even charge an individual after 28 days I don't see what difference another 62 days is going to make. If there's still nothing to charge the person with after that period you wouyld have to release them anyway. I thought the vote was a victory for democracy.

55136[/snapback]

 

I think the point was that he (Blair) didnt even try to justify the 90 day period. I'm willing to listen to arguments that, however Draconian (and it is a huge impingement on individual civil liberties) that 90 days could be justifiable given the potential threat to society. However if I were to be persuaded I'd want to see some damn good evidence about the significance of this magical 90 day time limit and why say it was more beneficial than 89 days, 88, 87, 86, 85 etc etc.

 

The fact was that he didnt even attempt to do this which on the very best blush is arrogant and at worst dictatorial.

 

As you say, a victory for democracy.

[Rob W 0]

Do you realise that NO-ONE who has been held for 14 days has been charged with anything?

 

 

That for 95% of the time they sit in a cell at belmarsh and are not questioned

 

If we didn't need it against the IRa why do we need it now?????

[manc-mag 1]

Do you realise that NO-ONE who has been held for 14 days has been charged with anything?

 

 

That for 95% of the time they sit in a cell at belmarsh and are not questioned

 

If we didn't need it against the IRa why do we need it now?????

55162[/snapback]

 

Thats exactly the sort of question that should have been (and was) asked of the Government and is precisely what they failed to argue.

 

Incidentally I dont think IRA comparisons are justified tbh. Not because I see the current 'Muslim' terrorist threat as different because the suspects are mainly non-white, but because our Counter Terrorism intelligence in Northern Ireland was, before the cease-fire so comprehensive and advanced as we'd been involved in it for so long and had a wealth of information/network of informants etc. etc. The difference is that the current threat is still very new to the intelligence services and therefore i am prepared to accept that it might take them longer to gather all informtion they need.

 

I'm also perfectly aware that this is just as potent an argument against extending the current arrest without charge limits however.

Edited November 11, 2005 by manc-mag

[Guest alex]

On a slightly different note though still related to Human Rights, I heard on the radio the other day that there is still a man from provincial China in prison (some 16 years later) for his part in the student demonstrations at Tiannemen Square. His crime? Throwing an egg at a picture of Chairman Mao.

[manc-mag 1]

On a slightly different note though still related to Human Rights, I heard on the radio the other day that there is still a man from provincial China in prison (some 16 years later) for his part in the student demonstrations at Tiannemen Square. His crime? Throwing an egg at a picture of Chairman Mao.

55167[/snapback]

 

What sort of egg though?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Joke! That really is fucking terrible. Makes it even worse that the Government tries to curtail protest when Chinese dignatories visit the UK as we whore ourselves for trade agreements in the East.

 

I'm actually ashamed when I see people, many who've clearly been born and opressed in China/by China eg Tibet, and who've come to the UK only to have their British RIGHT to demonstrate taken away from them by Government sanctioned over zealous policing.

[Guest alex]

Apparently the person in question now has severe mental problems due to his treatment in prison.

[Rob W 0]

ahhh but tthe Tibetans aren't likely to buy British arms are they?