The Zohan

Brilliant, Armed Police save a lot of peoples lives by preventiuon and intervention, do you have any figures on how many inocent people they have shot dead in the last 10 years?

Perhaps we would all be a lot safer if we withdrew firearms from the police just incase it happens again, its not like the criminals have access to them now is it!

Innocents in Guantanamo - i suppose what you define as innocent, travelling on false papers in an area known to be used by terrorists for whatever pupposes, who knows....

jacrobat

Unfortunately, our American cousins have an odd sense of what constitutes a known terrorist area (well unless Tuscany is now a Taliban stronghold) and are quite prepared to trample on another country's sovereignty when they feel like it: -

Imam Rapito affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Leslie

I agree with what Luan Pra Bang has been saying in this thread.

I imagine that there are guilty people in Guantanamo but equally that there are people who completely innocent.

Ask yourself why that place is in existence in the first place. What is special about Guantanamo which would be different in the USA. Do you think it might be because no American or any other country's law applies there and therefore they can effectively do what they like to the prisoners incuding torture and keep them imprisoned without a hope of any legal redress? In other words the civilised existence of Habeas Corpus is neutralised, rather like our government had in mind with the proposed 42 day detention.

What do you think of their policy of "rendition" where they just fly a prisoner off to a country where there are no laws against extreme torture?

Do you think that is a civilised way to treat those prisoners? Is it right that they can be held in a virtual concentration camp because their captors do not have any concrete evidence to convict them? Are you who were speaking up for that kind of treatment really so selfish as to support such actions? Let me remind you of the time honoured attitude towards anyone by the State and that is that one is innocent until proved guilty! That is a basic tenet of our law in a civilised society. Let me assure you that if you support actions outside that then you are treading a very dangerous path for the future.

If they cannot prove a man is guilty of terrorism or whatever, he should be released until they find true evidence of his guilt!

I believe that Guantanamo will be a blot on the character of the USA for the future and that our government should be ashamed for supporting their actions in that respect.

Les

escott

iTrader: (1)

I completely agree.

If the people there are guilty - try them and prove it. I can't understand how for so long this has been allowed to happen - it goes against everything the US (and UK) is supposed to stand for.

fivetide

iTrader: (1)

Devil's advocate here...

Consider OJ Simpson. Everyone knows he did it. Completely obvious. The police everyone knew it. Proof was still hard to come by despite that freeway chase and eventually the case collapsed.

Essentially he got away with murder for a very long time, technically still is doing really.

Now, what about these guys? It is well and good for people on here to say these guys are innocent but as has already been raised, who holidays in a war zone?

We have no idea what led to these people beign detained but given the cost and the bad publicity i'd have thought they'd have a good reason even if they didn't have enough proof to charge them. Remember OJ only killed his mrs, we are talking here about people who could potentially kill hundreds of innocent people. If there is a serious doubt over them then maybe they should be locked up.

5t.

finalzero

Jean Charles de Menezes
The british muslim in London who was shot by armed police and then later told "sorry our intel was retarded"

Thats one too many for me.. "looked like a terrorist" - **** off! He was executed plain and simple.

Having visible armed police would act as deterance but it would also mean the criminals step up a gear and start getting armed (visibly) - catch 22 situation.

Luan Pra bang

Journalists for starters and what about normal afgans and pakistanis who live there. The percentage of European inmates is small and by all accounts all of this is irrelevant

We do have a good idea of the flawed methadology that lead to people being acused of terrorism though.


I think the point of guilt is irrelevant for the moment. We have built a structure to our justice system that is designed to stop more powerfull people being able to abuse the law to punish weaker people. Experience has shown that people with the power almost invariably abuse the fact. In the UK we built a system where any individuals power is controlled and regulated by strict rules and guidlines, this is what makes the UK a great place to live. To have a situation where we no longer can control, or even find out what those in power are up to is unacceptable and if we let it continue our own rights will be eroded even more.

hodgy0_2

you do have to wonder at the pro Guantanamo, pro torture, pro fly people to the back of beyond and stick probes on thier gonads brigade

they seem sooo certain that anyone not wearing a shirt and trousers and who is found living east of Dover is a terrorist and hence deserves everyhing the USA can throw at them

EddScott

The dude was a sneaky toad who got caught somewhere he shouldn't have been being taught things he shouldn't be taught.

Say it was a case of - lock him up for a while and torture him a bit for information or leave him be and risk him blowing a plane up or a train or whatever.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one.

fivetide

iTrader: (1)

I would say the point of guilt is very relevant. As you rightly point out we have developed a system which allows people protection no matter what.

The question and problem is, should these people be allowed to take advantage of that fact?

Of course terrorists these days are almost entirely home grown. They are 'as British as you and me' to the outside.

As an example:

BBC NEWS | INDEPTH | LONDON ATTACKS

"Shehzad Tanweer, 22, Aldgate bomber
Shehzad Tanweer was born in Bradford but lived most of his life in the Beeston area of Leeds.
Neighbours described the sports science graduate as a "nice lad" who could "get on with anyone". Friends said he was very religious, but did not express an interest in politics.

In 2004 he travelled to the Pakistani city of Karachi along with Khan.

The two became known to the security services, but were on the periphery of other surveillance operations.

Tanweer detonated his bomb on the eastbound Circle line, killing seven others."

Attending these camps is just one of many reasons that people have been locked up at Guantanamo. Locking these guys up may well have saved lives.

As I say, just playing devil's advocate but i do feel that we have to be careful about the level of rights people have versus the protection of innocent lives. Currently the human rights lobby, as demonstrated last week with that joke of an award to Bin Laden's man in Britain is actually too strong to make policing effective. He's managing to stay in this country because he might be tortured in Jordan. How is that good for this country?

5t.

Geezer

That is all fair enough Les, and to be honest, I agree with what you have said.

However, this type of war is not clear cut like WWII etc. The opposing side are not just your average army, obeying orders of the government, they are extremists who are willing to kill anyone and everyone. OK, some might say that the Russians and Germans behaved the same way, but basically you knew who you were fighting.

Any foreign nationals in Afghanistan should only be

a) ISAF troops

b) Recognised Observers

C) Red Cross/ Aid workers

d) Journalists

What on earth is anyone else doing there who doesn't live there? The options are few really.

Why would someone from Bradford go to a war zone unless he is required to or has volunteered to for humanitarian purposes?

I think Guantanamo Bay is not necessarily a good thing, but in this type of war, it as a necessary thing. The ends justify the means. I'm sure there are 'innocent people' there, but if they have been caught in Afghanistan, you have to question their rationale for being there.

Take off and nuke Afghanistan from space, it's the only way to be sure

Geezer

Martin2005

If those 'ends justify the means' then we have already lost I'm afraid.

To keep describing this as a war is flawed thinking in my opinion, this is a law inforcement issue, plain and simple. It is demonstrably not a war, as you cannot go to war against something that has no structure....an ideology.
The 'war on terror' was a dumbass label given by the neocons to rally people behind, a war on terrorists might of been a more sensible label, but hell, when were neocon ever sensible.

BTW I fully support our action and involvement in Afganistan, I believe we have to secure the country from the extremists, the Taliban should never be allowed to return.

The ends do not justify the means, they simple serve to make the 'ends' even worse!!

The Zohan

Charles De Menezes - British Muslim where did that come from?!? - er no, Brazilian Christian i believe

He was shot in error several days after 52 men, women and children lost their lives due to Mulim extremeist terorists blowing up trains and buses.

I think you will find the criminals took the lead re firemarms, recently, criminal gangs such as the Yardies back in the 90's and now the eastern european and asian gangs along with people from 3rd world war torn areas such as Somalia! A lot of these animal will think nothing of killing you or your family to make a point.

The guns are here due to our lax borders as are the drugs and criminals who enter our country sell the drugs and use the guns.

If you think one is too many than what next - no more armed police because of one error?

ask the 100's of people who's lives have been saved by the likes of CO19 if they think they are not needed. Our armed Police are some of the best trained and highly skilled andm continually assed mentally and physically. Probably the best in the world and i for one am happy to have them there!

Loss of innocent life is a real shame under and circumstances...The fact that this is such a rare occurance given the huge increase in gun and knife activity is testament to the skill, courage and trianing of the armed police units.

I hope that you are never in a position that you need them to protect or save you or your family!

Leslie

Locking people up purely on suspicion without the facts to convict them is a dangerous practice and would lead eventually to a repressive government and the death of any kind of democracy.

Les

Janspeed

iTrader: (1)

Do people get senteced to death for crimes they didnt commit?

EddScott

cster

I think the Geneva conventions are a bit anachronistic given the nature of wars waged by some people in this day and age.
Not wearing a uniform or even hiding among civilians might be a sensible strategy for a fighter, but the quid pro quo would appear to be some degree of watering down of the rights expected by a "POW".
The Taleban may well be fighting against an invading force, but they are not a sovereign army and indeed it would appear they are pitted against the sovereign army of Afghanistan.

Janspeed

iTrader: (1)

Indeed!

I wonder how many limb-less folks are out there doing naughty stuff!