new concession for terror bill. - Page 9

garinda · 11-06-2008, 23:26

...and I'm glad the Conservatives didn't manage to stop this going through.

andrewb · 11-06-2008, 23:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

As for me being afraid of being banged up, well no, I have nothing to fear.

So your happy to be locked up for 42 days? You're innocent yes, but so are other people who have been detained to the current maximum period. You wouldn't be angry at all?

This is quite clearly going to make people angry. It's going to make young muslims angry. It's going to help as a recruiting agent, as we saw in ireland when we did exactly the same thing! I'm glad 306 crossbench MP's were able to look at evidence rather than emotions.

BERNADETTE · 11-06-2008, 23:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

...and I'm glad the Conservatives didn't manage to stop this going through.

Me too

garinda · 11-06-2008, 23:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewb

So your happy to be locked up for 42 days? You're innocent yes, but so are other people who have been detained to the current maximum period. You wouldn't be angry at all?

This is quite clearly going to make people angry. It's going to make young muslims angry. It's going to help as a recruiting agent, as we saw in ireland when we did exactly the same thing! I'm glad 306 crossbench MP's were able to look at evidence rather than emotions.

Why mention Muslims?

Two of the people I know personally were maimed by Irish Nationalist, and a lone right wing imbecile.

Christian, Hindu, Jew, Muslim, we are all vunerable to terrorism in this country.

For you to single out Muslims is out of order, and only inflames tension.

andrewb · 11-06-2008, 23:35

Bernadette, the only argument used is that those extra days might save lives, therefore than can be extended to any number of days. Can you HONESTLY tell me you have thought about this from an innocent persons point of view? Emotive language is being used to win the argument, but when you stand back and look there is no evidence to back the emotive language up.

David Davis is one of the most educated people on the subject and he says this, honestly, think about it.

Quote:

I have no sympathy for terrorists whatsoever, but I want the House to imagine for a moment what if feels like if you are innocent under this regime.

You are taken from your bed in the early hours of the morning.
You are locked in a cell for 6 weeks - 1000 hours - and you do not know why - not what you are accused of, not what the suspicions are, not what the evidence is.

You do not know what is happening to your job.
You do not know what is happening to your reputation.
You do not know what is happening to your wife and the neighbours.
You do not know what is happening to your children, facing sometimes the harsh cruelty of other children.
You do not know this for six weeks - 1000 hours.

So what we have is the worst of all worlds.
A symbolic assault on liberty which is unnecessary.
A change in the law which is counter-productive.
And a procedure which is unworkable.
Isn't the only way to describe what the government is proposing today is that it is ineffective authoritarianism?"

garinda · 11-06-2008, 23:35

Soft on terrorism and patronising to boot, well done.

blazey · 11-06-2008, 23:35

Should add that I was for the terror bill just for the peace of mind. Andrew kindly pointed out that 28 days has been greatly successful so far, so to me that indicates this measure will only be used in limited and reasonable circumstances, and rightly so

andrewb · 11-06-2008, 23:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

Why mention Muslims?

Two of the people I know personally were maimed by Irish Nationalist, and a lone right wing imbecile.

Christian, Hindu, Jew, Muslim, we are all vunerable to terrorism in this country.

For you to single out Muslims is out of order, and only inflames tension.

Don't be stupid. Go and look at who has been held under the terrorism act. Go and look at the threat were facing today. It's quite obvious to anybody that the main threat is from muslim extremism.

garinda · 11-06-2008, 23:40

You do not know if the bus to your job will explode.
You do not know if your wife and the neighbours will be killed by nail bomb.
You do not know what is happening to your children as the Olympic Stadium explodes, whilst they are visiting.

andrewb · 11-06-2008, 23:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

You do not know if the bus to your job will explode.
You do not know if your wife and the neighbours will be killed by nail bomb.
You do not know what is happening to your children as the Olympic Stadium explodes, whilst they are visiting.

Again no substance. Give us evidence. Give ONE OUNCE of evidence to prove your case and I will do a full u-turn. I know you won't because you can't. All you can do is use scaremongering tactics.

Bonnyboy · 11-06-2008, 23:42

Glad the Bill got approved.

Terrorist plots are going on all the time. These guys plot away every evening on their computers. They plot on their instant messengers. Do they plot from home….No, they use Internet Cafes in different cities and the like. Of course the Police need more time.

I for one would be very angry if I lost loved ones due to a terrorist attack and the best the coppers could come up with was “yeah, we had our suspicions about them for a while now”

If the law is used as it should be and not abused, there are no issues for me.

blazey · 11-06-2008, 23:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

You do not know if the bus to your job will explode.
You do not know if your wife and the neighbours will be killed by nail bomb.
You do not know what is happening to your children as the Olympic Stadium explodes, whilst they are visiting.

Ah life of the unknown.

You do not know whether you are going to get knocked down by a bus tomorrow.
You do not know whether your neighbour is going to burn down your house while you sleep.
You do not know whether the Olympic Stadium is just going to collapse on your head due to shoddy workmanship.

I love the unknown, don't you.

shillelagh · 11-06-2008, 23:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewb

No I meant 28 days. No more than 28 days have ever been needed. Not my opinion, FACT.

Wrong!!! Problem is i cant tell you why!

andrewb · 11-06-2008, 23:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by shillelagh

Wrong!!! Problem is i cant tell you why!

Because it is correct. Why could you not us why?

garinda · 11-06-2008, 23:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewb

Don't be stupid. Go and look at who has been held under the terrorism act. Go and look at the threat were facing today. It's quite obvious to anybody that the main threat is from muslim extremism.

No need to start being rude. Manners cost nothing.

As I've said many times already, people held under suspicion of terrorism, with no charge, versus even one life that might be saved in the future, equals no contest.

With the increased threat to the people of this country, as the London Olympics draw nearer, I'm glad stronger measures are now in place if needed, to help thwart terrorist attacks.