| Guilty untill proven innocent on 12:52 - Aug 25 with 2446 views | QuakerJack |
I'm not entirely sure on his main argument but I'm struggling to disagree with a lot of what he's saying.
The good thing about Boris is that he can get away with saying stuff like this, much of which we're all thinking, because he's got that loveable fool way about him. |  |
|  |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 13:01 - Aug 25 with 2420 views | JackoBoostardo |
Why should we afford human rights to those who so freely and blatantly ignore the same rights in their victims.
National Security, and the protection of innocent civilians must surely be the prime concern for all in charge.
I'm all for stricter controls in this sense. Terrorism is not a 'normal' crime and we are not dealing with a 'normal' enemy here! They have no morals, no guilt and no civility - they're sub human in everyway and not worthy of a human rights act as a shield! [Post edited 25 Aug 2014 13:15]
|  |
| |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 13:05 - Aug 25 with 2414 views | QuakerJack |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 13:01 - Aug 25 by JackoBoostardo |
Why should we afford human rights to those who so freely and blatantly ignore the same rights in their victims.
National Security, and the protection of innocent civilians must surely be the prime concern for all in charge.
I'm all for stricter controls in this sense. Terrorism is not a 'normal' crime and we are not dealing with a 'normal' enemy here! They have no morals, no guilt and no civility - they're sub human in everyway and not worthy of a human rights act as a shield! [Post edited 25 Aug 2014 13:15]
|
Struggling to disagree with any of this. | |
| |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 13:15 - Aug 25 with 2398 views | Dr_Winston |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 13:01 - Aug 25 by JackoBoostardo |
Why should we afford human rights to those who so freely and blatantly ignore the same rights in their victims.
National Security, and the protection of innocent civilians must surely be the prime concern for all in charge.
I'm all for stricter controls in this sense. Terrorism is not a 'normal' crime and we are not dealing with a 'normal' enemy here! They have no morals, no guilt and no civility - they're sub human in everyway and not worthy of a human rights act as a shield! [Post edited 25 Aug 2014 13:15]
|
Tricky one this.
The assumption of innocence until guilt is proven is one of the things that sets us apart from these animals, but on the other hand they're obviously not heading out to Syria for a Club 18-30. |  |
| Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. |
| |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 13:31 - Aug 25 with 2357 views | JackoBoostardo |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 13:15 - Aug 25 by Dr_Winston |
Tricky one this.
The assumption of innocence until guilt is proven is one of the things that sets us apart from these animals, but on the other hand they're obviously not heading out to Syria for a Club 18-30. |
It has potential to be tricky, but we have to start taking severe action against those who would happily slaughter innocent people, otherwise we are simply letting this happen (and providing a subliminal green light also).
We need rules set in stone to revoke the much abused European Convention and put to trial the presumed guilty terrorists under the UK's own perception of "Terrorist Rights". For reference "Terrorist Rights" would only provide a guarantee that trial will be fair. The focus will be on preserving UK justice, security and sanctifying the rights of any victims. The Guilty will be prevented from having probation, leave and segregated in a high security process. This system would not have a purpose of "re-establishment back into society" but instead be purely punishment based - and will be life-long sentences.
Terrorists afterall kill innocent people, taking many lives to instill fear into a populace. The most severe sentence will have to be the minimum we can offer. | |
| |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 13:34 - Aug 25 with 2351 views | Swansea_Viking |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 13:15 - Aug 25 by Dr_Winston |
Tricky one this.
The assumption of innocence until guilt is proven is one of the things that sets us apart from these animals, but on the other hand they're obviously not heading out to Syria for a Club 18-30. |
It is a difficult one in many respects but these terrorists get away with it as they probably know we will tie ourselves up in knots worrying about the morality of our actions therefore allowing them to act with such impunity.
This is no conventional war and such thing as the Geneva convention et al mean nothing to these barbarians but we have to do something. Hell even Al Qeada see IS as too extreme and that is frightening.
Do we link up with Assad? Look what happened in Iraq and Libya after we removed Saddam and Gaddafi. As abhorrent as these two were, there was less instability in those areas. We try ?To impose democracy in these primarily tribal areas and it does not work and probably needs a strong dictator type to maintain stability as unpalatable as it sounds.
This current lot though are much more brazen and need to be stopped. Saudi Arabia, Qatar et al end to be brought to task and made to help the situation instead of depending on the yanks, us, Frrance and other western countries.
Take away British citizenship (and therefore their protection) for those that do join these maniacs is the first step. [Post edited 25 Aug 2014 13:35]
|  |
| |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 13:42 - Aug 25 with 2331 views | JackoBoostardo |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 13:34 - Aug 25 by Swansea_Viking |
It is a difficult one in many respects but these terrorists get away with it as they probably know we will tie ourselves up in knots worrying about the morality of our actions therefore allowing them to act with such impunity.
This is no conventional war and such thing as the Geneva convention et al mean nothing to these barbarians but we have to do something. Hell even Al Qeada see IS as too extreme and that is frightening.
Do we link up with Assad? Look what happened in Iraq and Libya after we removed Saddam and Gaddafi. As abhorrent as these two were, there was less instability in those areas. We try ?To impose democracy in these primarily tribal areas and it does not work and probably needs a strong dictator type to maintain stability as unpalatable as it sounds.
This current lot though are much more brazen and need to be stopped. Saudi Arabia, Qatar et al end to be brought to task and made to help the situation instead of depending on the yanks, us, Frrance and other western countries.
Take away British citizenship (and therefore their protection) for those that do join these maniacs is the first step. [Post edited 25 Aug 2014 13:35]
|
But taking away is ineffectual as our system is completely incapable of guaranteeing these terrorists stay away. Consider a story last week of a Bosnian criminal deported from the UK, only to re-enter several days later!
Not only does the UK need to pull a thumb out in terms of preventative measures to stop these c*nts entering the UK, but we need effective means of deporting new entrants and asylum seekers who commit a crime during their first five years in the UK. Also, we need to get tough and consider more permanent options too! Where there is no question of guilt whatsoever, such as the slaughter of Lee Rigby in the streets of London, then the death sentence as a non-martyr is a realistic option that will send a clear message of our intentions going forward. | |
| |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 13:45 - Aug 25 with 2333 views | Windy_Miller |
The issue and the problem is our "Rules of engagement"
Until we fight these animals on an even keel then they will never be afraid or feel remorse for their actions. There needs to be a basic fear factor for ISIS and the Islamic radicals and moderates also. Talk of ASBOS as a deterrent are laughable as most islamist's don't live their daily lives in our worlds' rules and regulations anyway. Its a bit like telling someone on a life sentence in prison that their cars going to be repossessed.
The old adage 'fight fire with fire' is needed now.
What do these f*ckers hold dear to them - go for that, and f*ck their ideology out the window.
Putin is a C*nt but you gotta admire his stance - "One more islamist Incident in Russia and i'm nuking Mecca...."
That should work. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 15:29 - Aug 25 with 2258 views | controversial_jack |
The guy isn't a full box of matches. |  | | |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 15:42 - Aug 25 with 2230 views | DwightYorkeSuperstar |
One of the biggest mistakes of recent times is parting ways with Assad.
We got away with it in Libya with Gadaffi where that almost escalated into hell without him controlling him but without Assad in Syria the area really as fallen apart. |  |
| |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 15:50 - Aug 25 with 2212 views | oh_tommy_tommy |
Putin is a c...
But unfortunately he has been right about Syria all along .
America needs to get in there now and sort this mess out. |  |
| |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 15:51 - Aug 25 with 2210 views | Davillin |
By way of preface, I disagree most strenuously with the suggestion that one of the greatest legal rules in History -- the presumption of innocence before a jury decides guilt -- be even remotely tampered with. Knowing our British and American governments, that would simply open the door to extending the new rule bit by bit until we'd all lose that presumption.
Remember, that would include YOU, you innocent child, you.
On the other hand, Johnson, those like him, and, for me, especially the U.S. federal government, are truly insane treating this as a matter for criminal procedure. They don't want to admit that we're at war with ISIS, and that this wss an act of war.
If ever "an eye for an eye" would be appropriate, it is now. |  |
| |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 15:56 - Aug 25 with 2197 views | controversial_jack |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 15:51 - Aug 25 by Davillin |
By way of preface, I disagree most strenuously with the suggestion that one of the greatest legal rules in History -- the presumption of innocence before a jury decides guilt -- be even remotely tampered with. Knowing our British and American governments, that would simply open the door to extending the new rule bit by bit until we'd all lose that presumption.
Remember, that would include YOU, you innocent child, you.
On the other hand, Johnson, those like him, and, for me, especially the U.S. federal government, are truly insane treating this as a matter for criminal procedure. They don't want to admit that we're at war with ISIS, and that this wss an act of war.
If ever "an eye for an eye" would be appropriate, it is now. |
I agree with you, however doesn't your own country contradict these principles at a certain naval base in Cuba?
This alleged war with isis has come as a distraction to the genocide in Gaza | | | |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 19:28 - Aug 25 with 2094 views | exiledclaseboy |
Johnson's a buffoon. You don't do away with thousands of years of legal precedent along with the main principle the entire legal system of all developed countries is based on just on a whim. |  |
| |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 20:24 - Aug 25 with 2046 views | JackoBoostardo |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 19:28 - Aug 25 by exiledclaseboy |
Johnson's a buffoon. You don't do away with thousands of years of legal precedent along with the main principle the entire legal system of all developed countries is based on just on a whim. |
It's not a whim when national security is involved against a threat that is not thousands of years old.
With modern risks we need to have modern safeguards. | |
| |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 20:34 - Aug 25 with 2031 views | Pacemaker |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 20:24 - Aug 25 by JackoBoostardo |
It's not a whim when national security is involved against a threat that is not thousands of years old.
With modern risks we need to have modern safeguards. |
The problem is in recent years there have various new laws which have been aimed at dealing with "new types of crimes" none of which have been successful and all of which have damaged all our civil liberties to some extent.
It is very difficult to undo laws and you only have to look at some of the internment laws in place between 1970s and 1990s in NI which we all thought were fair at first but soon used to round up anyone and the cause of much resentment and a call to arms to the youth of NI. |  |
| Life is an adventure or nothing at all. |
| |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 20:40 - Aug 25 with 2018 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 20:24 - Aug 25 by JackoBoostardo |
It's not a whim when national security is involved against a threat that is not thousands of years old.
With modern risks we need to have modern safeguards. |
It is a whim. No one had heard of ISIS (or whatever they're called this week) six weeks or so ago. In six months time there'll be another "threat" that will be terrifying us all into agreeing to give up yet more of our civil liberties. Internment next perhaps? Lock them all up so they can't travel to Syria or Iraq, whether they were planing to or not.
This post has been edited by an administrator | |
| |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 20:41 - Aug 25 with 2016 views | exiledclaseboy |
Pacemaker made my points for me, and more eloquently, as he often does. An eminently sensible man. | |
| |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 20:52 - Aug 25 with 1996 views | JackoBoostardo |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 20:40 - Aug 25 by exiledclaseboy |
It is a whim. No one had heard of ISIS (or whatever they're called this week) six weeks or so ago. In six months time there'll be another "threat" that will be terrifying us all into agreeing to give up yet more of our civil liberties. Internment next perhaps? Lock them all up so they can't travel to Syria or Iraq, whether they were planing to or not.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
But we did know of ISIS six weeks ago, and before this. They are a breakaway section (a more hardcore element) of Al Qaeda with links to the Muslim Brotherhood.
At times like this I'd rather forgo the civil liberties of a terrorist trying to return to the UK after fighting for ISIS, than suffer a further terrorist attack in the UK. These are circumstances and decisions that have been forced on to the UK population. | |
| |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 20:56 - Aug 25 with 1992 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 20:52 - Aug 25 by JackoBoostardo |
But we did know of ISIS six weeks ago, and before this. They are a breakaway section (a more hardcore element) of Al Qaeda with links to the Muslim Brotherhood.
At times like this I'd rather forgo the civil liberties of a terrorist trying to return to the UK after fighting for ISIS, than suffer a further terrorist attack in the UK. These are circumstances and decisions that have been forced on to the UK population. |
No, they are the circumstances and decisions that want to be forced on us. It's not just the civil liberties of terrorists (or potential/suspected/would-be terrorists) that disappear when the public gets whipped up into a terrified frenzy like this. It's yours and mine too. There always has been and always will be a "threat" which governments will use to manipulate populations into giving up basic freedoms. It's happened throughout history, much more so in the last 20 years or so though. You can't protect freedom by removing people's freedoms. | |
| |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 21:25 - Aug 25 with 1968 views | Pacemaker |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 20:52 - Aug 25 by JackoBoostardo |
But we did know of ISIS six weeks ago, and before this. They are a breakaway section (a more hardcore element) of Al Qaeda with links to the Muslim Brotherhood.
At times like this I'd rather forgo the civil liberties of a terrorist trying to return to the UK after fighting for ISIS, than suffer a further terrorist attack in the UK. These are circumstances and decisions that have been forced on to the UK population. |
There is a good chance that many of those who do return will be traumatised by their experiences if the police or security services can use them to gain quality intelligence or use them to highlight the fact it was not an experience to savour that would do more to cut down on any sort of holy war recruitment. | |
| Life is an adventure or nothing at all. |
| |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 21:27 - Aug 25 with 1966 views | controversial_jack |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 20:52 - Aug 25 by JackoBoostardo |
But we did know of ISIS six weeks ago, and before this. They are a breakaway section (a more hardcore element) of Al Qaeda with links to the Muslim Brotherhood.
At times like this I'd rather forgo the civil liberties of a terrorist trying to return to the UK after fighting for ISIS, than suffer a further terrorist attack in the UK. These are circumstances and decisions that have been forced on to the UK population. |
You want to play right into their hands? | | | |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 21:37 - Aug 25 with 1945 views | DwightYorkeSuperstar |
I though this happened anyway.
Being detained without bail is being held on the presumption of being guilty is it not?
An extreme case would be Guantanamo but even non terror related crimes can result in you being detained for months, sometimes years before your trial. | |
| |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 21:43 - Aug 25 with 1939 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 21:37 - Aug 25 by DwightYorkeSuperstar |
I though this happened anyway.
Being detained without bail is being held on the presumption of being guilty is it not?
An extreme case would be Guantanamo but even non terror related crimes can result in you being detained for months, sometimes years before your trial. |
No, being remanded in custody while investigations are continuing means that you're considered to be at risk of absconding if you were given bail. It's not a presumption of guilt because there is no such thing.
Guantanamo is different. It's an abomination and a stain on the surface of humanity. | |
| |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 21:47 - Aug 25 with 1927 views | DwightYorkeSuperstar |
| Guilty untill proven innocent on 21:43 - Aug 25 by exiledclaseboy |
No, being remanded in custody while investigations are continuing means that you're considered to be at risk of absconding if you were given bail. It's not a presumption of guilt because there is no such thing.
Guantanamo is different. It's an abomination and a stain on the surface of humanity. |
What about in American prisons where if you cannot afford your bail, often in the hundreds of thousands of dollars even for non violent and less extreme crimes, you are stuck in prison, quite often for a number of years before your trial?
It's detaining people without knowing they're guilty, only being released if proven innocent in their trial. Sounds like what Boris wants if you ask me.
I disagree with it too by the way. It's as silly as his floating airport legacy idea. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
