This Co-ilition seems to be working. - Page 5

Margaret Pilkington · 19-05-2010, 19:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric

Terrorists and other assorted scumbags are a fact of life in these troubled times. When they break the law; they should be tried and punished according to the law.

perhaps your laws in Canada are more robust.

Do you then condone, the accommodation of men who give nothing to the country that they themselves have come to, for the prime purpose of committing atrocities against the hosts.

An eminent Judge ruled that these men posed a risk....and still do pose a risk to the security of this country, but yet he gave them the right to be protected in this country....the country that they seemingly despise.
Do you consider that to be justice?

They say that they will be abused and tortured...but then they lied to get into the country...purporting to be students, but dropping out of studies soon after enrolment.
One of them gained employment in a company that produced chemicals(hairdressing supplies)....chemicals that he would have blown the centre of Manchester up with......at the Easter holiday when it would be full of people.
Yet, we are expected with good grace to accept this ruling and pay for the monitoring of these terrorists...this at a time when we are being expected to tighten our belts.

It is galling in the extreme to find that our Home Secretary(newly in post) is 'disappointed' and has no plans to challenge this ruling.

It sends out the message to the world 'terrorists...find a welcome in the UK, they will look after your every need'
Not good!

Mancie · 19-05-2010, 19:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric

Terrorists and other assorted scumbags are a fact of life in these troubled times. When they break the law; they should be tried and punished according to the law.

Spot on Eric... these people should be tried and punished according to the law... British law...possibly the greatest distinction between us and the fanatical nutcases like the Taliban or Al-Quada is that we are civillized and have standards which those nutters are trying to destroy.
Some of the abuses of our Human Right laws are hard to swallow.. but I'd rather that than stoop as low as those scumbags we are at war with.

Mancie · 19-05-2010, 19:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

perhaps your laws in Canada are more robust.

Do you then condone, the accommodation of men who give nothing to the country that they themselves have come to, for the prime purpose of committing atrocities against the hosts.

An eminent Judge ruled that these men posed a risk....and still do pose a risk to the security of this country, but yet he gave them the right to be protected in this country....the country that they seemingly despise.
Do you consider that to be justice?

They say that they will be abused and tortured...but then they lied to get into the country...purporting to be students, but dropping out of studies soon after enrolment.
One of them gained employment in a company that produced chemicals(hairdressing supplies)....chemicals that he would have blown the centre of Manchester up with......at the Easter holiday when it would be full of people.
Yet, we are expected with good grace to accept this ruling and pay for the monitoring of these terrorists...this at a time when we are being expected to tighten our belts.

It is galling in the extreme to find that our Home Secretary(newly in post) is 'disappointed' and has no plans to challenge this ruling.

It sends out the message to the world 'terrorists...find a welcome in the UK, they will look after your every need'
Not good!

Why have these bods not been prosecuted as terrorists?...if there is even the slightest evidence that these people intended to bomb and kill then I don't understand why they have not been charged...I would not accept any of this rubbish about not having enough evidence to prosecute these people, if there is ANY evidence they should be tried by a jury of British men and women.

Eric · 19-05-2010, 20:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

perhaps your laws in Canada are more robust.

Do you then condone, the accommodation of men who give nothing to the country that they themselves have come to, for the prime purpose of committing atrocities against the hosts.

An eminent Judge ruled that these men posed a risk....and still do pose a risk to the security of this country, but yet he gave them the right to be protected in this country....the country that they seemingly despise.
Do you consider that to be justice?

They say that they will be abused and tortured...but then they lied to get into the country...purporting to be students, but dropping out of studies soon after enrolment.
One of them gained employment in a company that produced chemicals(hairdressing supplies)....chemicals that he would have blown the centre of Manchester up with......at the Easter holiday when it would be full of people.
Yet, we are expected with good grace to accept this ruling and pay for the monitoring of these terrorists...this at a time when we are being expected to tighten our belts.

It is galling in the extreme to find that our Home Secretary(newly in post) is 'disappointed' and has no plans to challenge this ruling.

It sends out the message to the world 'terrorists...find a welcome in the UK, they will look after your every need'
Not good!

From what I've observed, our laws on this issue are much like yours. And I'm surprised that you can twist my opposition to torture as condoning the accomodation of terrorists. I link my detestation of torture with a whole bunch of other, related opinions: I'm opposed to genocide, the recruitment of child soldiers, the use of rape as a weopon of war, racism, homophobia, poverty and starvation ... and numerous other things that happen in countries which do not have the benefit of the civilising effects of the rule of law.

Within living memory, the British and their allies sat in judgement at Nuremburg and determined that the flouting of international conventions, the murder of millions of Jews, Russina POWs, homosexuals, gypsies, the mentally handicapped, and, in general, anyone who objected the the way they did things, the enslavement and torture of civilians, was not only abhorrent, but illegal. And that not even the actions and commands of a legally constituted government could make them acceptable in any sense ... in other words, "I was merely obeying orders" is neither excuse nor defense.

I do know from what I read and hear in our media that the Canadian troops fighting in Afghanistan do, in general, believe in what they are fighting for: to bring peace, security, and the rule of law for the Afghan people.

cashman · 19-05-2010, 20:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mancie

Why have these bods not been prosecuted as terrorists?...if there is even the slightest evidence that these people intended to bomb and kill then I don't understand why they have not been charged...I would not accept any of this rubbish about not having enough evidence to prosecute these people, if there is ANY evidence they should be tried by a jury of British men and women.

O.K. i dont accept these bods would be tortured if returned to Pakistan! Do You? its beyond reasonable doubt they are liars, also Amnesty International have NO information about Al Quidea or Taliban supporters being Tortured, yet they got plenty about "Anti" Taliban etc being. seems to me a case of believe what suits.

Mancie · 19-05-2010, 20:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

O.K. i dont accept these bods would be tortured if returned to Pakistan! Do You? its beyond reasonable doubt they are liars, also Amnesty International have NO information about Al Quidea or Taliban supporters being Tortured, yet they got plenty about "Anti" Taliban etc being. seems to me a case of believe what suits.

To be honest if these bods have been planning to blow people up I couldn't give a toss if they are beaten to death... but only within our law.

Margaret Pilkington · 19-05-2010, 20:32

It was for technical reasons......originally there were 12 arrests......10 of the terrorists returned to Pakistan voluntarily.......so that is what makes me doubt the claims that these men make that they would be subject to abuse and torture.

The police had a surveillance operation in place, but some police top brass allowed the sensitive information to get into the public domain(he was later relieved of his post)....the police had to bring the operation forward and there were simultaneous raids in Liverpool, Manchester and across the north west.

DaveinGermany · 19-05-2010, 20:34

Eric I applaud your moral stance, it is to be commended. But being a Canadian citizen the threat levels your Country experience are far lower than ours in the UK. From 1969 we've had dealings with terrorists (Northern Ireland) which have only really died down in the last few years but there is an underlying simmering resentment.

And from our first excursion into Iraq then later Afghanistan (1990 - ????) we've also had to contend with Muslim extremists & Al Queda threatening our Land, you see we have a long history of being threatened so our moral sites may be a little more jaded than those Countries who haven't had quite so many dealings with the pain & misery terrorists & terrorism causes. That I think you'll find is why most of the views of the folk on here are as they are.

For us in the UK it is a "very real & prominent threat" to coin a phrase. It is good to be able to have high moral standards but put yourself in our very British shoes & you'll see why we feel as we do.

Margaret Pilkington · 19-05-2010, 20:38

Eric, I was not twisting anything......I merely asked a question....and you have answered that question.

I just don't see how the rights of two men who came to the UK with the intent of blowing as many folk into the next world as they could, can equate with the rights of the many, who are now being asked to support(financially) their monitoring in this country, without a challenge to that ruling...as they still pose a risk to the population.

Wynonie Harris · 19-05-2010, 20:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mancie

To be honest if these bods have been planning to blow people up I couldn't give a toss if they are beaten to death... but only within our law.

I couldn't care less what happens to then and under whose law it happens, as long as they're shipped out of this country...but, then again, I place far more importance on the protection of innocent people (of any nationality) than I do on the protection of would-be terrorists.

Margaret Pilkington · 19-05-2010, 20:42

Eric, I also believe that there is adifference when you are fighting the enemy in their own land, but when they have an outpost in your own country it is a little bit different.
There is nothing at all to say that these men will not radicalise other young muslim men to do what they failed to do......blow up Manchester Town Centre.

Margaret Pilkington · 19-05-2010, 20:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

I couldn't care less what happens to then and under whose law it happens, as long as they're shipped out of this country...but, then again, I place far more importance on the protection of innocent people (of any nationality) than I do on the protection of would-be terrorists.

I am 100% in agreement with you there Wyn.

Mancie · 19-05-2010, 20:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

Eric, I was not twisting anything......I merely asked a question....and you have answered that question.

I just don't see how the rights of two men who came to the UK with the intent of blowing as many folk into the next world as they could, can equate with the rights of the many, who are now being asked to support(financially) their monitoring in this country, without a challenge to that ruling...as they still pose a risk to the population.

It does not equate.. but that is the law in this land..and I'd rather have the law in my land than any other ... there is no excuse for these people not being charged and put on trail for their evil doings no matter what Government we had or have.

cashman · 19-05-2010, 20:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mancie

It does not equate.. but that is the law in this land..and I'd rather have the law in my land than any other ... there is no excuse for these people not being charged and put on trail for their evil doings no matter what Government we had or have.

can ya compare it to the law in any other land Mancie? i can n i dont prefer ours. though i thought same as you until i lived there.

Margaret Pilkington · 19-05-2010, 20:57

Mancie, it might be the law of the land, but they were awarded their right to stay by the court of appeal....this ruling can (and should) be challenged by the Home Secretary...especially as the judge made the comment that 'they were and still do pose a risk to security'.
It should have to be proved beyond any doubt that they would be tortured if they were returned to Pakistan.