Terror suspects deportation ruling

[Loch-Ness-Monster]

Linky

So, do you think that Britain shouldn't be allowed to deport terror suspect back to their home countries because the darlings might face a little discomfort back home?

I say fuck them. This is turning Britain into a joke. Countries like France and Italy aren't so gutless when dealing with terros suspects and have deported them regardless of their treatment. I don't see why we somehow owe something to these people. So what if they managed to sneak their way into this country, I don't think that should mean we have a duty of care towards these people. Particularly not if there's suspicion that there's a danger to this country.

[Korriken]

Britain is aleady a joke, that just adds some humor to the notion that the government is essentially powerless. the criminals run the streets, the gun and knife crime rate continues to rise, despite the gun and knife ban, the police are unarmed except for a small force of armed police, the judges walk all over the government, and most people there are spineless cowards who think that nothing is worth fighting for.

its hilarious! when the british government speaks, the people who don't like it just say, "oh fuck you, I'll do what I want!" and the government turns around and punishes the law abiding citizens for it.

[Korriken]

It's also unfortunate that the UK doesn't have the spine to execute anyone, including terror suspects. Terrorism should be a capital offense, and the people who engage in it should be dangled, just like Uncle Saddam. But no, "ooh we can't execute people, they might not like it! Let's just clothe, feed, entertain, and house them for the rest of their lives"

they already did away with executions, next thing on the list is to make jail more comfortable. Next thing you know everyone gets their very own completely enclosed cell with a full sized canopy bed with a choice of pillow top or tight top mattress, porcelain toilet with a padded seat, a shower, and a mini fridge to keep snacks. Ooh, and don't forget a menu and having their meals delivered to their cell.

when that happens, I'm going to the UK, and break someone's neck with my bare hands ,laugh as Martials Arts classes get banned, and I basically get a comfortable hotel room to live in the rest of my life.

[Britkid]

At 4/29/07 01:23 PM, Korriken wrote: Britain is aleady a joke, that just adds some humor to the notion that the government is essentially powerless. the criminals run the streets, the gun and knife crime rate continues to rise,

Well, hello there. A pathetic little troll. Gun crime? Firearm murders per capita. The United States are 8th in the world. Oooh look, there the UK is on 32nd.

Just murders? US in 24th, we are down in 46th.

Assaults? The USA over 1.5 million more than its nearest rival.

Nice one.

despite the gun and knife ban, the police are unarmed except for a small force of armed police,

Aaah, as opposed to the 'shoot first, ask questions later' philosophy which the USA police seem to have employed.

the judges walk all over the government, and most people there are spineless cowards who think that nothing is worth fighting for.

You have no fucking idea what you're talking about. The judges aren't sending people to prison because we're running out of spaces. As for 'spineless cowards', what have you ever done in your life that indicates courage apart from slump in a chair and make slurs about Britain.

its hilarious! when the british government speaks, the people who don't like it just say, "oh fuck you, I'll do what I want!" and the government turns around and punishes the law abiding citizens for it.

Yes, we are Soviet Russia in disguise.

At 4/29/07 01:31 PM, Korriken wrote: It's also unfortunate that the UK doesn't have the spine to execute anyone, including terror suspects. Terrorism should be a capital offense, and the people who engage in it should be dangled, just like Uncle Saddam. But no, "ooh we can't execute people, they might not like it! Let's just clothe, feed, entertain, and house them for the rest of their lives"

It's entirely inhumane. If there's the slightest possibility that they are innocent, then it's murder. Besides, when terrorists are executed other extremists use them as martyrs. Letting them rot in a jail works better.

they already did away with executions, next thing on the list is to make jail more comfortable. Next thing you know everyone gets their very own completely enclosed cell with a full sized canopy bed with a choice of pillow top or tight top mattress, porcelain toilet with a padded seat, a shower, and a mini fridge to keep snacks. Ooh, and don't forget a menu and having their meals delivered to their cell.

You have first-hand experience of this? And it's called privileges. If the prisoner is well-behaved, then they get certain privileges such as a small TV. We actually want to put these people back into the world, not just crush them.

when that happens, I'm going to the UK, and break someone's neck with my bare hands ,laugh as Martials Arts classes get banned, and I basically get a comfortable hotel room to live in the rest of my life.

Oooh you're hard.

[SyntheticTacos]

Because shared prison cells where you have quite a possibility of getting anally raped on a regular basis, have no rights, can't leave with worse food than in school cafeterias are "comfy little hotel rooms." I don't think that we should let all criminals just run free but I think that many people who try to be so hard on crime have no idea what a real prison is like.

[Proteas]

At 4/29/07 02:09 PM, TheRoyalEnglishman wrote: Well, hello there. A pathetic little troll. Gun crime? Firearm murders per capita. The United States are 8th in the world. Oooh look, there the UK is on 32nd.

He was referring to your own BBC News network's recent article on how, despite all the draconian firearm bans your country has instituted, gun crime is on the rise... a fact that seems to fly in the face of modern liberl logic which usually states "no guns = no gun crime."

when that happens, I'm going to the UK, and break someone's neck with my bare hands ,laugh as Martials Arts classes get banned, and I basically get a comfortable hotel room to live in the rest of my life.

Oooh you're hard.

Actually, he has a point. Your country banned an inatimate object as apposed to looking at the human element that caused the crime problem in the first place... kind of bizzare logic for such a logical and well-spoken group of people, don't you think?

[Britkid]

At 4/29/07 03:06 PM, Proteas wrote: He was referring to your own BBC News network's recent article on how, despite all the draconian firearm bans your country has instituted, gun crime is on the rise... a fact that seems to fly in the face of modern liberl logic which usually states "no guns = no gun crime."

That was in 2003. I can't veryify this, but I think that rate has dropped by now. Besides, in cases in other countries, after a gun ban the crime rate soars initially because of all the guns already in circulation, and then drops because that supply is slowly drained.

Actually, he has a point. Your country banned an inatimate object as apposed to looking at the human element that caused the crime problem in the first place... kind of bizzare logic for such a logical and well-spoken group of people, don't you think?

They're working on that as well. What they need to do is crack down on the dealers. Besides, when we didn't have the ban, cases such as Hungerford and Dunblaine killed about the equivalent to everyone else who died in those years of gun crime. Once we get to the source, the supply will dry up.

[Politics]

Let's just kill everyone we don't like, or suspect of committing crimes.

It's not like they could be or are productive members of society. And even if they were, who needs that?

[uhnoesanoob]

hey d00ds ima make fun of X and say Y is better >:O

[Proteas]

At 4/29/07 03:45 PM, TheRoyalEnglishman wrote: That was in 2003. I can't veryify this, but I think that rate has dropped by now.

After a quick search, I'll have to admit that statistics do kind of agree with you... but what's this about "air rifles" and "other weapons" I wonder...? >:-D~

[Britkid]

At 4/29/07 04:22 PM, Proteas wrote: After a quick search, I'll have to admit that statistics do kind of agree with you... but what's this about "air rifles" and "other weapons" I wonder...? >:-D~

Oh yeah. People use them to rob banks and stuff. Kind of like a more sophisticated 'banana gun'. Fear can be useful for this sort of crime.

[SyntheticTacos]

Notice how they're terror suspects. Anybody ever heard of innocent until proven guilty?

[emmytee]

Key words being: 'suspect'
&
' international human rights law'

Britain may be a joke in the USA, but its not us the rest of the word is laughing at.

[Elfer]

At 4/29/07 12:56 PM, Loch-Ness-Monster wrote: Countries like France and Italy aren't so gutless when dealing with terros suspects and have deported them regardless of their treatment.

The issue with these kinds of statements is basically this:

If your country condemns the treatment of prisoners that they find unethical, is it ethical to knowingly send people to face such treatment?

Of course, it's always possible to say "Fuck ethics, they started it"

[Korriken]

At 4/29/07 02:09 PM, TheRoyalEnglishman wrote:
Well, hello there. A pathetic little troll. Gun crime? Firearm murders per capita. The United States are 8th in the world. Oooh look, there the UK is on 32nd.

the UK gun crime rate also doubles in the years following the ban. i would hate to see that happen to america.

Nice one.

despite the gun and knife ban, the police are unarmed except for a small force of armed police,

Aaah, as opposed to the 'shoot first, ask questions later' philosophy which the USA police seem to have employed.

better the criminal than the cop.

the judges walk all over the government, and most people there are spineless cowards who think that nothing is worth fighting for.

You have no fucking idea what you're talking about. The judges aren't sending people to prison because we're running out of spaces.

then make more space! either that or fix the underlying social issues causing the crime.

As for 'spineless cowards', what have you ever done in your life that indicates courage apart from slump in a chair and make slurs about Britain.

well i used to work in a slaughter house that had more than its share of angry bulls, any of which could have gored or trampled me to death, and yet i hopped into the pen with them to force them into the kill line every day for 6 and a half months. does that count?

its hilarious! when the british government speaks, the people who don't like it just say, "oh fuck you, I'll do what I want!" and the government turns around and punishes the law abiding citizens for it.

Yes, we are Soviet Russia in disguise.

if you say so.

It's entirely inhumane. If there's the slightest possibility that they are innocent, then it's murder.

like i said... spineless cowards. if you're unwilling to administer justice, then why even bother arresting people?

Besides, when terrorists are executed other extremists use them as martyrs. Letting them rot in a jail works better.

yeah, let em rot in jail where the terrorist organizations can claim that the guy is being tortured among other things to drum up more support to fight the evil...

You have first-hand experience of this? And it's called privileges. If the prisoner is well-behaved, then they get certain privileges such as a small TV. We actually want to put these people back into the world, not just crush them.

I can understand giving them an education, I can understand not crushing their souls and free will, but prison is as much punishment as it is rehab. if you make the prisons too comfortable, then no one will fear going to prison. Also, you miss the point. The precedence has been set. people once considered burning at the stake and draw and quartering to be just punishments. Today, its considered murder. Now, life in prison is the harshest punishment. How long before that becomes "cruel"? then what? now a long prison sentence is the worst punishment and will be considered "cruel" before you know it, prisons won't even be used, because they are "cruel".

Oooh you're hard.

......... you miss the point completely....

[Korriken]

At 4/29/07 02:18 PM, SyntheticTacos wrote: Because shared prison cells where you have quite a possibility of getting anally raped on a regular basis, have no rights, can't leave with worse food than in school cafeterias are "comfy little hotel rooms." I don't think that we should let all criminals just run free but I think that many people who try to be so hard on crime have no idea what a real prison is like.

If you commited a crime, you should be punished. I say we should reimpliment corporal punishment. if someone does something minor, smack their ass a few times in public with a HUGE stick and let them go. its humiliating as hell, but it gets the point across without wasting money in keeping then locked up for 6 months-1 year.

I wasn't calling today's prison cells "comfy little hotel rooms" I was calling the future prison cells that, because that is what it is coming to. people always view the toughest thing that can happen as "cruel." However my previous point has gone over this.

[Britkid]

At 4/30/07 12:46 AM, Korriken wrote: the UK gun crime rate also doubles in the years following the ban. i would hate to see that happen to america.

And if you refer to Proteas' second link, then you will see it has dropped in recent years. It's about patience, not just going 'OH NO, IT'S IMMEDIATELY DOUBLED, let's go back to where we started'. And it didn't double, it went up by about 33%.

better the criminal than the cop.

Yes, especially when the 'criminal' is an innocent.

then make more space! either that or fix the underlying social issues causing the crime.

We've done a lot more about that than America have seemed to. We don't have ghettos or any of that stuff.

if you say so.

No I don't. What you said was rubbish.

like i said... spineless cowards. if you're unwilling to administer justice, then why even bother arresting people?

Ah, so a sense of morality makes me a 'coward'. If there is sufficient evidence, send them to prison. Executing them is like what they did.

yeah, let em rot in jail where the terrorist organizations can claim that the guy is being tortured among other things to drum up more support to fight the evil...

Actually, that's what offshore American jails do to 'suspects', not actually people who have already been convicted. Besides, that's better than making the terrorist the latest pin-up boy who 'all young Muslims should aspire to'.

......... you miss the point completely....

The point is rubbish anyway. Come over here, break someone's neck and then get life sentence with Bob the Big guy in the corner doing you every week. Or, if you behave well, twenty years.

Don't count your chickens about the future either. I say we keep things here as they are.

[Cybex]

At 4/29/07 01:23 PM, Korriken wrote: Britain is aleady a joke, that just adds some humor to the notion that the government is essentially powerless. the criminals run the streets, the gun and knife crime rate continues to rise, despite the gun and knife ban, the police are unarmed except for a small force of armed police, the judges walk all over the government, and most people there are spineless cowards who think that nothing is worth fighting for.

its hilarious! when the british government speaks, the people who don't like it just say, "oh fuck you, I'll do what I want!" and the government turns around and punishes the law abiding citizens for it.

I must be somewhere else when all that happens then, because whenever I go out, Britain's a very well run country. I'm sure you've got more experience of Britain though.

[Loch-Ness-Monster]

At 4/29/07 08:13 PM, SyntheticTacos wrote: Notice how they're terror suspects. Anybody ever heard of innocent until proven guilty?

I think the principle of innocent until proven guilty should apply when people are charged with crimes, but I think it would be stupid to apply that in the context of deportations. If there are any doubts as to wether a foreign national is a danger to this country they should be deported.

At 4/29/07 08:40 PM, emmytee wrote: ' international human rights law'

Then screw international law, I don't see why this country should be dictated to by a bunch of foreign bureaucrats. Plenty of countries, even civilised western ones break international law all the time. What can they do about it, call the police? Anyway, if it came to it we could just withdraw from all the treaties that prohibit this kind of thing. We're supposedly a sovereign country, it's about time we started acting like one.

[Elfer]

At 4/30/07 12:21 PM, Loch-Ness-Monster wrote: Then screw international law, I don't see why this country should be dictated to by a bunch of foreign bureaucrats.

There's a difference between signing an agreement and being dictated to.

[emmytee]

At 4/30/07 12:21 PM, Loch-Ness-Monster wrote: Then screw international law, I don't see why this country should be dictated to by a bunch of foreign bureaucrats. Plenty of countries, even civilised western ones break international law all the time. What can they do about it, call the police? Anyway, if it came to it we could just withdraw from all the treaties that prohibit this kind of thing. We're supposedly a sovereign country, it's about time we started acting like one.

It's easy for you to say from a position of power. I wonder what you would say if the iranians tortured those British soldiers they took. Sure, they were innocent, but they were 'suspects' of invading Iranian waters. Maybe they should have been sent to Egypt to be tortured?

[Loch-Ness-Monster]

At 4/30/07 02:00 PM, emmytee wrote: It's easy for you to say from a position of power. I wonder what you would say if the iranians tortured those British soldiers they took. Sure, they were innocent, but they were 'suspects' of invading Iranian waters. Maybe they should have been sent to Egypt to be tortured?

Apples and oranges here. I'm not talking about torturing them, I'm talking about deporting them and washing our hands on them. Wether or not these Libyans are tortured by the Libyan government is of no concern to Britain. As long as we're not the ones doing the torturing.

[Memorize]

At 4/30/07 02:00 PM, emmytee wrote:

It's easy for you to say from a position of power. I wonder what you would say if the iranians tortured those British soldiers they took. Sure, they were innocent, but they were 'suspects' of invading Iranian waters. Maybe they should have been sent to Egypt to be tortured?

I don't know. Maybe people would be pissed because we have better GPS and it states they weren't even in Iranian waters.