mafia996630
© 2009 Jeff Minard
+319|7065|d
Greater Manchester Police have released without charge all 11 men arrested a fortnight ago in the north-west of England over an alleged terror plot. The last two men to be released have joined nine others given their freedom last night.

Gordon Brown had claimed the operation uncovered a "very big plot" against the UK.

In a statement, Greater Manchester police said: "The 11 men were questioned and the evidence gathered presented to the CPS who advised there was insufficient evidence gathered within the permitted timescales which would have allowed a warrant of further detention to be gathered or charges to be pursued.

"It is not possible to bail people under terrorism legislation so the men were released.

"Public safety is always the police's top priority and all information is fully considered and acted upon appropriately to minimise risk to the public."

In a press conference on the steps of the police headquarters, chief constable Peter Fahy said: "These people are innocent and they walk away … there are constant threats to this country but we totally respect the situation, we respect that they are innocent until proved guilty."

Fahy denied that there had been a dispute with the security services or that bringing the arrests forward by up to 12 hours had disrupted the investigation. He criticised speculation by outsiders, including retired officers, but added: "I have not conducted any speculation. I do not feel embarrassed or humiliated by what we have done because we have carried out our duty. I don't think a mistake has been made at all."

The BBC has reported that security services continue to maintain that a terrorist plot had been disrupted by the operation.

Nine of the men are due to be deported after being handed over to the UK Border Agency but it was not immediately clear what would happen to the last two men. One of the 11 is understood to be a British national. The releases came after investigators spent 13 days searching for evidence following the arrests from a number of addresses in Greater Manchester, Liverpool and Lancashire under the Terrorism Act.

The police operation was condemned today by a spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain. Inayat Bunglawala told Radio 4's Today programme: "When these arrests took place in very dramatic circumstances with students being pulled from universities and thrown to the floor, we were told by the prime minister, no less, that this was part of a very big terrorist plot. Clearly there just has not been the evidence produced to substantiate such a plot.

"We would hope that senior ministers and the prime minister will understand that it is completely unfair to make prejudicial and premature remarks in cases like this.

"It is perfectly understandable that not every arrest the police make will result in charges being brought … that is the nature of this sort of police work. What is unacceptable is for the government to make prejudicial remarks right at the outset.

"Now that we learn that actual evidence cannot be gathered to substantiate any terror plot, instead of releasing them with good grace and making clear a mistake has been made, the government is seeking to deport them, citing a very vague national security threat. That is a very dishonourable way of proceeding."

The raids led to the resignation of the country's leading counter-terrorism officer, Bob Quick, after he inadvertently allowed details of the operation to be photographed. Before the men had been interviewed the prime minister spoke of how the police had foiled a "very big plot", but as early as last Monday it emerged the government had spoken to Pakistani officials seeking reassurances that if the men were deported they would not be tortured.

The Guardian understands the decision to arrest the suspects on 8 April came after a three-way row between MI5, senior officers in the Metropolitan police and the Greater Manchester police. MI5 was strongly of the opinion that the arrests should wait while more intelligence was gathered. But in an example of the tensions between Whitehall counter-terrorism officials and their counterparts in the police, the decision was made to take "executive action" even though the intelligence suggested there was little evidence to charge the suspects.

It is understood anti-terrorist officers in the Met disagreed with their counterparts in Greater Manchester that the arrests should be made. But the concern that there was a threat to the public led to the decision being made to move in.

Investigators had desperately hoped they would find something at the suspects' homes. But after initially hunting for, and failing to find, bomb-making equipment, they turned to the computers with their fingers crossed that some evidence of a plot would turn up. They found nothing substantial.

Despite media reports and the plot being talked up by Brown, there was never any evidence that the suspects had identified targets for an attack.

The arrests came several hours earlier than the police had planned after Quick accidentally allowed a top secret briefing document on the raids, Operation Pathway, to be caught on camera by a photographer outside Downing Street when he went to brief ministers on the action. The error led to his resignation after politicians condemned the security breach.

But although police sources said bringing forward the arrests may have compromised the operation, it was only brought forward by hours, which is unlikely to have substantially reduced the amount of evidence available to investigators.

Greater Manchester police said last night that nine of the men, aged between 22 and 38, had been transferred into the custody of the UK Borders Agency. The Home Office said: "We are seeking to remove these individuals on grounds of national security. The government's highest priority is to protect public safety. Where a foreign national poses a threat to this country we will seek to exclude or to deport, where this is appropriate."

Officers from the north-west counter-terrorism unit arrested 12 men under the Terrorism Act following the raids on 8 April. Of the 12 men initially arrested, 11 are Pakistani nationals, 10 held student visas and one is British.

Greater Manchester police said searches were continuing at a property in Cheetham Hill, Manchester. "Protecting the public is the main focus of the police. These arrests were carried out after a number of UK agencies gathered information that indicated a potential risk to public safety," the force said. A 12th suspect, an 18-year-old, was released without charge and handed to the Border Agency for deportation on 11 April.

The arrests led to claims that the student visa system contained loopholes which allowed abuse by people attempting to enter the country for illegal activities.

The government has admitted that the system is flawed and, two weeks ago, introduced tougher measures designed to root out false applications. At the time of the arrests counter-terrorism sources expressed the fear that al-Qaida was using Pakistani students not known to the security services.
FUCKING TOLD YOU SO!

someone want to quote me. k thx.

Edit: ill do it:

mafia996630 wrote:

I wonder how long before the people that were arrested are released.
1 week, 5 days ago, http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=124126
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6953|USA

mafia996630 wrote:

Greater Manchester Police have released without charge all 11 men arrested a fortnight ago in the north-west of England over an alleged terror plot. The last two men to be released have joined nine others given their freedom last night.

Gordon Brown had claimed the operation uncovered a "very big plot" against the UK.

In a statement, Greater Manchester police said: "The 11 men were questioned and the evidence gathered presented to the CPS who advised there was insufficient evidence gathered within the permitted timescales which would have allowed a warrant of further detention to be gathered or charges to be pursued.

"It is not possible to bail people under terrorism legislation so the men were released.

"Public safety is always the police's top priority and all information is fully considered and acted upon appropriately to minimise risk to the public."

In a press conference on the steps of the police headquarters, chief constable Peter Fahy said: "These people are innocent and they walk away … there are constant threats to this country but we totally respect the situation, we respect that they are innocent until proved guilty."

Fahy denied that there had been a dispute with the security services or that bringing the arrests forward by up to 12 hours had disrupted the investigation. He criticised speculation by outsiders, including retired officers, but added: "I have not conducted any speculation. I do not feel embarrassed or humiliated by what we have done because we have carried out our duty. I don't think a mistake has been made at all."

The BBC has reported that security services continue to maintain that a terrorist plot had been disrupted by the operation.

Nine of the men are due to be deported after being handed over to the UK Border Agency but it was not immediately clear what would happen to the last two men. One of the 11 is understood to be a British national. The releases came after investigators spent 13 days searching for evidence following the arrests from a number of addresses in Greater Manchester, Liverpool and Lancashire under the Terrorism Act.

The police operation was condemned today by a spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain. Inayat Bunglawala told Radio 4's Today programme: "When these arrests took place in very dramatic circumstances with students being pulled from universities and thrown to the floor, we were told by the prime minister, no less, that this was part of a very big terrorist plot. Clearly there just has not been the evidence produced to substantiate such a plot.

"We would hope that senior ministers and the prime minister will understand that it is completely unfair to make prejudicial and premature remarks in cases like this.

"It is perfectly understandable that not every arrest the police make will result in charges being brought … that is the nature of this sort of police work. What is unacceptable is for the government to make prejudicial remarks right at the outset.

"Now that we learn that actual evidence cannot be gathered to substantiate any terror plot, instead of releasing them with good grace and making clear a mistake has been made, the government is seeking to deport them, citing a very vague national security threat. That is a very dishonourable way of proceeding."

The raids led to the resignation of the country's leading counter-terrorism officer, Bob Quick, after he inadvertently allowed details of the operation to be photographed. Before the men had been interviewed the prime minister spoke of how the police had foiled a "very big plot", but as early as last Monday it emerged the government had spoken to Pakistani officials seeking reassurances that if the men were deported they would not be tortured.

The Guardian understands the decision to arrest the suspects on 8 April came after a three-way row between MI5, senior officers in the Metropolitan police and the Greater Manchester police. MI5 was strongly of the opinion that the arrests should wait while more intelligence was gathered. But in an example of the tensions between Whitehall counter-terrorism officials and their counterparts in the police, the decision was made to take "executive action" even though the intelligence suggested there was little evidence to charge the suspects.

It is understood anti-terrorist officers in the Met disagreed with their counterparts in Greater Manchester that the arrests should be made. But the concern that there was a threat to the public led to the decision being made to move in.

Investigators had desperately hoped they would find something at the suspects' homes. But after initially hunting for, and failing to find, bomb-making equipment, they turned to the computers with their fingers crossed that some evidence of a plot would turn up. They found nothing substantial.

Despite media reports and the plot being talked up by Brown, there was never any evidence that the suspects had identified targets for an attack.

The arrests came several hours earlier than the police had planned after Quick accidentally allowed a top secret briefing document on the raids, Operation Pathway, to be caught on camera by a photographer outside Downing Street when he went to brief ministers on the action. The error led to his resignation after politicians condemned the security breach.

But although police sources said bringing forward the arrests may have compromised the operation, it was only brought forward by hours, which is unlikely to have substantially reduced the amount of evidence available to investigators.

Greater Manchester police said last night that nine of the men, aged between 22 and 38, had been transferred into the custody of the UK Borders Agency. The Home Office said: "We are seeking to remove these individuals on grounds of national security. The government's highest priority is to protect public safety. Where a foreign national poses a threat to this country we will seek to exclude or to deport, where this is appropriate."

Officers from the north-west counter-terrorism unit arrested 12 men under the Terrorism Act following the raids on 8 April. Of the 12 men initially arrested, 11 are Pakistani nationals, 10 held student visas and one is British.

Greater Manchester police said searches were continuing at a property in Cheetham Hill, Manchester. "Protecting the public is the main focus of the police. These arrests were carried out after a number of UK agencies gathered information that indicated a potential risk to public safety," the force said. A 12th suspect, an 18-year-old, was released without charge and handed to the Border Agency for deportation on 11 April.

The arrests led to claims that the student visa system contained loopholes which allowed abuse by people attempting to enter the country for illegal activities.

The government has admitted that the system is flawed and, two weeks ago, introduced tougher measures designed to root out false applications. At the time of the arrests counter-terrorism sources expressed the fear that al-Qaida was using Pakistani students not known to the security services.
FUCKING TOLD YOU SO!

someone want to quote me. k thx.

Edit: ill do it:

mafia996630 wrote:

I wonder how long before the people that were arrested are released.
1 week, 5 days ago, http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=124126
I wonder how many in England will live to regret that decision.
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6831|Global Command
Meanwhile, the brit gov increases security camera placements on the general public and uses the threat of radical islam to justify ever larger budgets.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6953|USA

ATG wrote:

Meanwhile, the brit gov increases security camera placements on the general public and uses the threat of radical islam to justify ever larger budgets.
I didn't know there was room left to increase security camera monitoring of the citizens of GB
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6923|London, England

lowing wrote:

I wonder how many in England will live to regret that decision.
None, we'll all be dead from the imminent strike!

Honestly, you can't regret a decision that had to be made, it had to be made because there wasn't enough or probably anything to prosecute them with. Maybe that has something to do with Mr.Quick showing the files out in the public, maybe it doesn't.

Personally I don't understand why there isn't more stringent measures when it comes to Pakistan, whether that's dealing with Brits who have connections to Pakistan, people flying to and from Pakistan, student visas. It's like how you treat Mexico, the problem is there but nobody deals with it.

I'm getting pissed off at how easy it seems for them

Last edited by Mekstizzle (2009-04-22 11:52:57)

rammunition
Fully Loaded
+143|6163
don't forget me dude

rammunition wrote:

what you missed out is that these arrests where bought forward, RUSHED, in other words due to Mr Quicks blunder. having said that there is a little doubt in me whether these guys are terrorists or not due to the arrests being rushed. we will have to wait and see
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pi … 6#p2592306
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6953|USA
The "rush" came in by trying to beat the release of these photos by the media. This probably lead to inadequate evidence. Hence my opinion of treason by the media.
kylef
Gone
+1,352|6795|N. Ireland
Holding on the grounds of "we think you're bad" would probably not last forever, anyway.
Diesel_dyk
Object in mirror will feel larger than it appears
+178|6296|Truthistan
They stopped whatever was about to happen, I think that's a success

Now 10 of the 12 are up for deportation and I'm sure if they are going to some place like Egypt, they will be getting a wet and shocking reception from their intelligence agencies.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6707|North Carolina

Diesel_dyk wrote:

they will be getting a wet and shocking reception from their intelligence agencies.
One can only hope...
rammunition
Fully Loaded
+143|6163

Turquoise wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

they will be getting a wet and shocking reception from their intelligence agencies.
One can only hope...
so a group of people are found innocent and you want them tortured?
Flecco
iPod is broken.
+1,048|6967|NT, like Mick Dundee

lowing wrote:

ATG wrote:

Meanwhile, the brit gov increases security camera placements on the general public and uses the threat of radical islam to justify ever larger budgets.
I didn't know there was room left to increase security camera monitoring of the citizens of GB
Outside of major centers there is sod all CCTV.

So yeah, plenty of room to expand into the Welsh and Scottish countrysides, along with parts of Ireland and bits and pieces of south west and northern England. ROLL ON AIRSTRIP ONE!


rammunition wrote:

so a group of people are found innocent and you want them tortured?
The term is not guilty asshat. As in, they didn't have enough evidence to prove that they were going to do it, the idea being not having enough evidence =/= being innocent. It's the standard western legal term now. You plead not guilty and are found not guilty. So they are being deported instead of being charged with a crime. Likely scenario that I'll speculate is this, they had enough info to know this lot were a fairly credible threat to other people's lives or property, but they didn't have the specifics to charge them in a court of law which is why the Security Service wanted to hang back and gather more intelligence on them. As it happens now the only option is to deport them. It's a balancing act. Their right to stay in the country and be happy doing what they want, vs. the risk against them infringing on your right to do the same thing.


Not the British Government's fault if their home country chooses to do nasty things to them.
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
Switch
Knee Deep In Clunge
+489|6765|Tyne & Wear, England
Aren't they being deported?  I'd sooner have them out of the country that sitting in British jails eating up taxpayers' money.
Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known.
mafia996630
© 2009 Jeff Minard
+319|7065|d

Flecco wrote:

The term is not guilty asshat. As in, they didn't have enough evidence to prove that they were going to do it, the idea being not having enough evidence =/= being innocent. It's the standard western legal term now. You plead not guilty and are found not guilty. So they are being deported instead of being charged with a crime. Likely scenario that I'll speculate is this, they had enough info to know this lot were a fairly credible threat to other people's lives or property, but they didn't have the specifics to charge them in a court of law which is why the Security Service wanted to hang back and gather more intelligence on them. As it happens now the only option is to deport them. It's a balancing act. Their right to stay in the country and be happy doing what they want, vs. the risk against them infringing on your right to do the same thing.


Not the British Government's fault if their home country chooses to do nasty things to them.
You can say what ever the fuk you want but its INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY,Period.Anywho an update:

The case of 12 men arrested over a suspected bomb plot in the UK who were all later released without any charges is to be independently reviewed.

Eleven Pakistani nationals are now in UK Border Agency custody and face possible deportation.

Lord Carlile of Berriew QC will look at the case as part of his ongoing role as independent reviewer of terrorism laws.

Greater Manchester Chief Constable Peter Fahy, defended the arrests, saying he was not "embarrassed".

'Serious questions'

But the Muslim Council of Britain says the government should admit it had made a mistake and claimed the way it had dealt with the men was "dishonourable".

Prime Minister Gordon Brown's spokesman told reporters: "We are seeking to remove these individuals on grounds of national security.

"The government's highest priority is to protect public safety. Where a foreign national poses a threat to the country, we will seek to exclude or deport them where appropriate."

However, lawyers for the men point out that they have not been charged and are innocent of any crime.

Of the 12 men arrested in raids in Liverpool, Manchester and Clitheroe in Lancashire, 11 were Pakistani nationals, with 10 holding student visas. One was from Britain.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) decided there was insufficient evidence to press charges - or to convince magistrates to allow police to hold the men any longer.

Greater Manchester Police led the inquiry and Mr Fahy said: "I do not believe a mistake has been made. I do not feel embarrassed or humiliated about what we have done. We carried out our duty."

He added the fact the raids had to be brought forward after Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick accidentally revealed secret documents to photographers had not affected the outcome.

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson added: "I am satisfied that the action taken was the right action taken and we now have to follow the proper legal process."

Lord Carlile said his self-appointed review would look at the use of the Terrorism Act 2000 in relation to the arrests as part of his "ongoing role".

He said no criticism should be implied by the inquiry which would run from 5 May to 31 July.

Mr Fahy said both the Muslim community and public at large understood the threat to the UK and that police would sometimes arrest people without pressing charges afterwards.

No criminal history

Lawyer Mohammed Ayub, who is representing three of the men, said in a statement: "After 13 days in custody, during which no evidence of any wrongdoing was disclosed, they have now been released without charge.

"Our clients have no criminal history, they were here lawfully on student visas and all were pursuing their studies and working part-time. Our clients are neither extremists nor terrorists."

Inayat Bunglawala, of the Muslim Council of Britain, said the government had been "dishonourable" over the way it had dealt with the men.

Mr Bunglawala told the BBC that when the arrests "took place in very dramatic circumstances of students being arrested at university and thrown to the floor" the public had been assured the men posed a serious threat.

He said it was unacceptable for the government to make these sorts of prejudicial remarks from the outset and then, having found insufficient evidence to bring charges, to deport the men anyway.

"Politics should not be interfering with what is primarily a legal process," he said.

Pakistan's high commissioner to the UK said he would provide legal assistance to the released students who should be allowed to complete their studies since no charges were brought.

"They are youngsters from very poor families...they spent all their savings and came here with passports and visas to pursue their education and they should be allowed... to pursue their education," he said.

Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne described it as "yet another embarrassment" for Home Secretary Jacqui Smith.

"Serious questions need to be answered about whether Bob Quick's blunder distorted this operation and on what grounds these men are being deported," he said.

Assistant Commissioner Quick - the UK's most senior counter-terrorism officer - quit his post a day after the operation.

However, the home secretary told MPs on Monday the error had not damaged the operation and the only impact had been that the raids had been brought forward "by a matter of hours".
Link:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8012838.stm

Last edited by mafia996630 (2009-04-22 15:59:42)

Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6707|North Carolina

rammunition wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

they will be getting a wet and shocking reception from their intelligence agencies.
One can only hope...
so a group of people are found innocent and you want them tortured?
I was actually being facetious.  I could be mistaken, but I think Diesel was as well.

I believe Diesel was hinting at the fact that foreign governments like Egypt's have a shady history of dealing with terror suspects.  As much as people complain about the U.S.'s and Britain's handling of them, many Middle Eastern governments aren't exactly egalitarian in their law systems.
Flecco
iPod is broken.
+1,048|6967|NT, like Mick Dundee

mafia996630 wrote:

Flecco wrote:

The term is not guilty asshat. As in, they didn't have enough evidence to prove that they were going to do it, the idea being not having enough evidence =/= being innocent. It's the standard western legal term now. You plead not guilty and are found not guilty. So they are being deported instead of being charged with a crime. Likely scenario that I'll speculate is this, they had enough info to know this lot were a fairly credible threat to other people's lives or property, but they didn't have the specifics to charge them in a court of law which is why the Security Service wanted to hang back and gather more intelligence on them. As it happens now the only option is to deport them. It's a balancing act. Their right to stay in the country and be happy doing what they want, vs. the risk against them infringing on your right to do the same thing.


Not the British Government's fault if their home country chooses to do nasty things to them.
You can say what ever the fuk you want but its INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY
Common misconception. It's not 'innocent until proven guilty', it's 'not guilty of the specific case the prosecution has lodged until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt'

K?
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
mafia996630
© 2009 Jeff Minard
+319|7065|d

Flecco wrote:

mafia996630 wrote:

Flecco wrote:

The term is not guilty asshat. As in, they didn't have enough evidence to prove that they were going to do it, the idea being not having enough evidence =/= being innocent. It's the standard western legal term now. You plead not guilty and are found not guilty. So they are being deported instead of being charged with a crime. Likely scenario that I'll speculate is this, they had enough info to know this lot were a fairly credible threat to other people's lives or property, but they didn't have the specifics to charge them in a court of law which is why the Security Service wanted to hang back and gather more intelligence on them. As it happens now the only option is to deport them. It's a balancing act. Their right to stay in the country and be happy doing what they want, vs. the risk against them infringing on your right to do the same thing.


Not the British Government's fault if their home country chooses to do nasty things to them.
You can say what ever the fuk you want but its INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY
Common misconception. It's not 'innocent until proven guilty', it's 'not guilty of the specific case the prosecution has lodged until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt'

K?
Same difference dude, wtf. The judge wouldn't even give them more time to question the suspect under terror laws.
m3thod
All kiiiiiiiiinds of gainz
+2,197|6973|UK

mafia996630 wrote:

Flecco wrote:

mafia996630 wrote:


You can say what ever the fuk you want but its INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY
Common misconception. It's not 'innocent until proven guilty', it's 'not guilty of the specific case the prosecution has lodged until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt'

K?
Same difference dude, wtf. The judge wouldn't even give them more time to question the suspect under terror laws.
They're still going to be deported.
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
mafia996630
© 2009 Jeff Minard
+319|7065|d

m3thod wrote:

mafia996630 wrote:

Flecco wrote:


Common misconception. It's not 'innocent until proven guilty', it's 'not guilty of the specific case the prosecution has lodged until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt'

K?
Same difference dude, wtf. The judge wouldn't even give them more time to question the suspect under terror laws.
They're still going to be deported.
I know. Point being, all this scare mongering is not helping anyone.
FatherTed
xD
+3,936|6802|so randum

rammunition wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

they will be getting a wet and shocking reception from their intelligence agencies.
One can only hope...
so a group of people are found innocent and you want them tortured?
released without charge doesn't mean we found them innocent.

They aren't, but likely we havnt got enough to prosecute them on. Deportation time though, one's already out i think.
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
mafia996630
© 2009 Jeff Minard
+319|7065|d

FatherTed wrote:

rammunition wrote:

Turquoise wrote:


One can only hope...
so a group of people are found innocent and you want them tortured?
released without charge doesn't mean we found them innocent.

They aren't, but likely we havnt got enough to prosecute them on. Deportation time though, one's already out i think.
I totally get where your coming from, but if you haven't been charged, you are Innocent. Lets say a police officer arrests someone for drink and drive, and once they get back to the nick, it turns out he wasn't really over the limit. They de-arrest him, so he's now back at the position he started off in.
Flecco
iPod is broken.
+1,048|6967|NT, like Mick Dundee

mafia996630 wrote:

m3thod wrote:

mafia996630 wrote:

Same difference dude, wtf. The judge wouldn't even give them more time to question the suspect under terror laws.
They're still going to be deported.
I know. Point being, all this scare mongering is not helping anyone.
That's true. I don't get what the big deal over this latest wave of terrorism is.

The UK has faced years of IRA activity yet suddenly the USA gets attacked by Islamic extremists and THEN the government increases the powers of the UK police and intelligence communities drastically. Yes, the London bombings were bad but afaik they increased the powers before then.


Why the sudden change in how we deal with terrorism? Australia actually had a few terrorist attacks in the 70s and 80s. You know, real ones that actually took place on our soil, yet we didn't extend the police powers then. No, only under Howard did we do that. What's the deal? How are hardline psychopaths masquerading as proper Muslims any more a threat than the IRA or guys like Timothy McVeigh?

Spoiler (highlight to read):
If they visit a strip club under any pretense they aren't proper Muslims imo. Could be wrong though. Maybe Beduin can clarify. The whole killing innocents = forbidden in the Qu'ran too... So yeah, those hijackers/bombers weren't very Muslim imo.

mafia996630 wrote:

Same difference dude, wtf. The judge wouldn't even give them more time to question the suspect under terror laws.
Makes all the difference to a lawyer. Using innocent until proven guilty is far to open for manipulation by the prosecution or the defence. The idea is to trap the bastards in and leave as few parts of law and legislation open to interpretation as possible or they can exploit it. Judges interpret law, lawyers are only meant to put it in practice using debate. If a legislator leaves a piece legislation's core definitions open enough that a lawyer can find a loophole and exploit it then the legislator has failed in his job. That's why the definitions of quite a few words are normally included in the legislation.

Last edited by Flecco (2009-04-22 16:55:09)

Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
mafia996630
© 2009 Jeff Minard
+319|7065|d
+!, good post.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6713|'Murka

mafia996630 wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

rammunition wrote:


so a group of people are found innocent and you want them tortured?
released without charge doesn't mean we found them innocent.

They aren't, but likely we havnt got enough to prosecute them on. Deportation time though, one's already out i think.
I totally get where your coming from, but if you haven't been charged, you are Innocent. Lets say a police officer arrests someone for drink and drive, and once they get back to the nick, it turns out he wasn't really over the limit. They de-arrest him, so he's now back at the position he started off in.
If they're as innocent as you claim, why are they being deported?
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
mafia996630
© 2009 Jeff Minard
+319|7065|d

FEOS wrote:

mafia996630 wrote:

FatherTed wrote:


released without charge doesn't mean we found them innocent.

They aren't, but likely we havnt got enough to prosecute them on. Deportation time though, one's already out i think.
I totally get where your coming from, but if you haven't been charged, you are Innocent. Lets say a police officer arrests someone for drink and drive, and once they get back to the nick, it turns out he wasn't really over the limit. They de-arrest him, so he's now back at the position he started off in.
If they're as innocent as you claim, why are they being deported?
Because they're fuking illegals, NOT because they're terrorists.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard