Good riddance?

[me283]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6281593.stm

So, the "Human Rights" campaigners say these men face torture in Algeria; but do they have to go back there? And doesn't this kind of undermine their claims anyway? "I would rather face torture than be kept under (non-harmful) house arrest"?

Interesting though... the claim is that they WILL face torture (according to the report)... not POSSIBLE torture... I wonder where they get that idea from?

[BBKing]

And doesn't this kind of undermine their claims anyway?

Undermine what claims?

Detention without trial under house arrest, apart from being contrary to our international obligations, un-British and contrary to everything we stand for, is torture leading to mental illness, as several of those subject to control orders* have already found (such as those who ended up in Broadmoor). Possibly given the certainty of torture here or the near certainty of torture in Algeria (which has an appalling record of human rights violations after the regime there cancelled democratic elections, so naturally they're on our side in the fight for freedom and democracy. Does anyone believe this s*** any more - ganging up with the Wahhabi al-Qaeda-sympathetic dictatorship Saudi Arabia to fight democratic, al-Qaeda-hating Iran - what's all that about?) they've decided the take the chance. A bullet in the back of the neck's probably better than dealing with the Home Office for the rest of eternity, anyway.

All in all, our great war for liberal democracy has resulted in us now being seen as about on a par with a torturing, secret police-ridden Arab state. Saddam would be delighted, and would doubtless point out to us that it's the only language they understand.

* Apart from the three who've escaped, and whose faces cannot be shown to us the public (so we can report them if we see them) because they're legally protected by, er, the control orders regime. If they'd been properly prosecuted and convicted and then escaped (which is less likely unless they were put in Sudbury extremely open prison) then there'd be no reason not to publish their photos everywhere. The escapes weren't announced by the Home Office but were snuck out in written answers - it's almost as if they don't want us to know. They've admitted knowing about the secret CIA gulags (that they previously denied) in the same way this week. Too busy dealing with important stuff like Jade Goody, presumably.

[me283]

Originally Posted by BBKing

Undermine what claims?

Detention without trial under house arrest, apart from being contrary to our international obligations, un-British and contrary to everything we stand for, is torture leading to mental illness, as several of those subject to control orders* have already found (such as those who ended up in Broadmoor). Possibly given the certainty of torture here or the near certainty of torture in Algeria (which has an appalling record of human rights violations after the regime there cancelled democratic elections, so naturally they're on our side in the fight for freedom and democracy. Does anyone believe this s*** any more - ganging up with the Wahhabi al-Qaeda-sympathetic dictatorship Saudi Arabia to fight democratic, al-Qaeda-hating Iran - what's all that about?) they've decided the take the chance. A bullet in the back of the neck's probably better than dealing with the Home Office for the rest of eternity, anyway.

All in all, our great war for liberal democracy has resulted in us now being seen as about on a par with a torturing, secret police-ridden Arab state. Saddam would be delighted, and would doubtless point out to us that it's the only language they understand.

* Apart from the three who've escaped, and whose faces cannot be shown to us the public (so we can report them if we see them) because they're legally protected by, er, the control orders regime. If they'd been properly prosecuted and convicted and then escaped (which is less likely unless they were put in Sudbury extremely open prison) then there'd be no reason not to publish their photos everywhere. The escapes weren't announced by the Home Office but were snuck out in written answers - it's almost as if they don't want us to know. They've admitted knowing about the secret CIA gulags (that they previously denied) in the same way this week. Too busy dealing with important stuff like Jade Goody, presumably.

And do you know the conditions of their "house arrest"? Also, who says they have to go back to Algeria? Maybe they could go to some other country...

As for this:

Possibly given the certainty of torture here

I think you forgot to put a smiley after it...

[Xaccers]

You also forgot to put "Hezbollah loving, Iraqi insurgent supporting, promising to wipe another nation off the face of the Earth, human rights abusing" before Iran.
Or would that make them look bad?

[bopdude]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

You also forgot to put "Hezbollah loving, Iraqi insurgent supporting, promising to wipe another nation off the face of the Earth, human rights abusing" before Iran.
Or would that make them look bad?

No no no, we can't say that or is it that they've 'volunteered' for deportation, to go back, and then come back here or who knows where under a different name, to maybe carry on where they left off, if they have been identified as being a risk, they should be detained indefinitely under the, risk to own and others health, psychopathic disorders (who in their right mind would blow themselves up in the name of a 'cause' ) and any other charge you can think of to keep them of the street, any streets, any nation.

[me283]

I just don't understand why these guys seem to think they "might" be tortured? Call me cynical, but I wonder if maybe that was just a "claim" to avoid deportation?

[Xaccers]

I dunno, maybe BBK's right, perhaps we shouldn't stop anyone who's likely to blow people up before they actually do it.
Perhaps we should only deal with them after they've actually blown people up.
You know, make sure their mushy remains have their day in court.
That way we can sit back and say "Even though 50 people are dead, we did the decent thing and didn't punish someone before the crime, so we get to look smug knowing we have the moral high ground"
Maybe their mushy remains can be sentenced to life in prison or something?

[David F]

Same rhetoric different day

Originally Posted by Xaccers

I dunno, maybe BBK's right, perhaps we shouldn't stop anyone who's likely to blow people up before they actually do it.
Perhaps we should only deal with them after they've actually blown people up.
You know, make sure their mushy remains have their day in court.
That way we can sit back and say "Even though 50 people are dead, we did the decent thing and didn't punish someone before the crime, so we get to look smug knowing we have the moral high ground"
Maybe their mushy remains can be sentenced to life in prison or something?

Well said.

Dont forget

The human rights act is ALWAYS the right way to go

[Mr Angry]

The comment from Gareth Peirce, who has an exemplary record as far as human rights and addressing injustices is concerned, is very telling.

"For these men there have been no convictions, no proper accusations, no knowledge of what is alleged against them and, astonishingly for most, no questioning by police to discover whether untested secret assumptions might be wrong."

She, of course, has the benefit of hindsight in that she is seeing history repeat itself. Internment without trial, which is what we are looking at here, proved to be the biggest terrorist recruiting tool in Northern Ireland. It appears the Government has learnt little or nothing in over 30 years - no surprise there.

It's quite fashionable to deride human rights nowadays but perhaps some people should take a step back and think?

What if your job involved holding a soldering iron, a rudimentary understanding of components and electronics and you were occasionally to be seen fiddling away in your garage or shed at nights? What if you had a interest in war / militaria which involved you wearing military fatigues on occassion? What if out of interest you had viewed a "martyrdom speech" on the web or had visited sites on the web for the genuine purposes of research / human interest to try and glean an understanding of the current conflict?

The UK has become a paranoid quasi police state where the authorities have powers beyond even the wildest predictions of Orwells 1984. They can rap you up and lock you up with no need for an explanation beyond alluding to any of the aforementioned and an ill informed media will do the rest for them.

Human rights are for everyone - please remember that if you ever find yourself locked up, God forbid, on the heresay of someone or on a Government whim.

[arcamalpha2004]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

The comment from Gareth Peirce, who has an exemplary record as far as human rights and addressing injustices is concerned, is very telling.

"For these men there have been no convictions, no proper accusations, no knowledge of what is alleged against them and, astonishingly for most, no questioning by police to discover whether untested secret assumptions might be wrong."

She, of course, has the benefit of hindsight in that she is seeing history repeat itself. Internment without trial, which is what we are looking at here, proved to be the biggest terrorist recruiting tool in Northern Ireland. It appears the Government has learnt little or nothing in over 30 years - no surprise there.

It's quite fashionable to deride human rights nowadays but perhaps some people should take a step back and think?

What if your job involved holding a soldering iron, a rudimentary understanding of components and electronics and you were occasionally to be seen fiddling away in your garage or shed at nights? What if you had a interest in war / militaria which involved you wearing military fatigues on occassion? What if out of interest you had viewed a "martyrdom speech" on the web or had visited sites on the web for the genuine purposes of research / human interest to try and glean an understanding of the current conflict?

The UK has become a paranoid quasi police state where the authorities have powers beyond even the wildest predictions of Orwells 1984. They can rap you up and lock you up with no need for an explanation beyond alluding to any of the aforementioned and an ill informed media will do the rest for them.

Human rights are for everyone - please remember that if you ever find yourself locked up, God forbid, on the heresay of someone or on a Government whim.

Could not have said it better.
Or perhaps the next time you are walking down a dark alley and there is a guy walking towards you, he looks a bit menacing, why not get the first punch or slash with a broken bottle in first?

[me283]

And all of this "human rights" claptrap, so soon after the security services are criticised for NOT doing something about tube bombers whom they had been watching... You can't have it both ways - either you do something to prevent those you suspect of terrorism, or you wait until they confirm your worst fears.

Still no answer to my question though - since people fly to Algeria every day, why should these people be so fearful of being tortured? After all, the government have been assured that it won't happen.

---------- Post added at 15:30 ---------- Previous post was at 15:28 ----------

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

Could not have said it better.
Or perhaps the next time you are walking down a dark alley and there is a guy walking towards you, he looks a bit menacing, why not get the first punch or slash with a broken bottle in first?

Or next time someone runs at you with fists raised, wait until he's actually punched you before you retaliate...

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by me283

Still no answer to my question though - since people fly to Algeria every day, why should these people be so fearful of being tortured? After all, the government have been assured that it won't happen.

Why do you expect someone to answer such an obvious question for you? I cannot believe that you would pretend to be naive enough so as to not be capable of making a fundamental distinction.

Yes, people fly to Algeria every day - none of them, however, would be people who previously left the country for fear of persecution. Whether that is the case with the individuals in question we don't know. They may say they have and as a democratic society the UK has a duty to protect and defend them from persecution until it can be proven otherwise.

I would expect, and hope, (as indeed I assume you would) that the same protection would be afforded to you if you were ever interned in a foreign country with no charges or evidence presented against you other than heresay, paranoia and rumour.

[me283]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

Why do you expect someone to answer such an obvious question for you? I cannot believe that you would pretend to be naive enough so as to not be capable of making a fundamental distinction.

Yes, people fly to Algeria every day - none of them, however, would be people who previously left the country for fear of persecution. Whether that is the case with the individuals in question we don't know. They may say they have and as a democratic society the UK has a duty to protect and defend them from persecution until it can be proven otherwise.

I would expect, and hope, (as indeed I assume you would) that the same protection would be afforded to you if you were ever interned in a foreign country with no charges or evidence presented against you other than heresay, paranoia and rumour.

I would hope that they would let me go home. But do we know WHY these people are allegedly being persecuted? Oh no, let's just believe them...

[AndyCambs]

it is strange that a lot of people who claim persecution in their "home country" then suddenly decide to make a trip home after being allowed asylum here.