12 Pakistanis arrested on terror charges.

[Donna Ferentes]

Has it not crossed your mind that the Security Servcies have access to far far more information about these individuals than you or I could ever have?

And yet not a single charge for all that "information". Not so much as a parking ticket.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Maybe if the sources or terrorisim were tackled more vigourously then we wouldn't find our general civil liberites were removed in the manner they are at the moment.

Wise words.

 

[PeterTCA]

Not necessarily but I have more faith in the sources of information that the Security Servcies have than what is said by uninformed people on here.

I believe that the reason that these were detained and then deported was there was enough evidence to show that they were dodgy but to reveal the sources of information could have damaged or endangered future operations of security service operatives.

Much easier to round them up and deport them as that way the suspects are still in the dark as to where the information about their activities come from. Putting them on trial would have compromised the sources of information.

"When I say MOVE, pick up your belongings and get on the truck"

 

[Andy the Don]

There must have been something dodgy about them or the police wouldn't have gone to so much trouble to get them.

Deport them and tell them not to bother trying to come back. We do need to tighten up the student visa system.

They had some intelligence on them, but intelligence is not the same as hard evidence that can be presented in a court. From reading about this case in the press. MI5 and the Met did not want the suspects arrested, but were over ruled by the Greater Manchester Police on whose patch any planned attack would most likely have happened. It also does not help matters when the government comes out saying "a massive plot has been foiled" or when the press use their tame police for off the record briefings/quotes. Then when no evidence can be found and the suspects are released we all go, "told you so, just picking on some poor chaps because they happen to be Pakistani Muslims".

 

[littlebabyjesus]

They had some intelligence on them.

We do not know that they had any 'intelligence' on them at all - we only have the police's word on that, and the truth of the matter will now never be tested in court.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

I think the salient point is not just that suspicion isn't court-tested proof, it's not necessarily anything. In any police investigation, people may at some point be suspected - but perhaps only to be ruled out later, or perhaps on the basis of information that's entirely wrong. The fact that somebody gets nicked doesn't just not mean they're guilty, it can quite often mean there didn't turn out to be anything on them - which itself doesn't mean the cops were wrong to nick them.

But you can't be releasing people without charge and then deporting them because intelligence-officer-taps-nose. Not in a democracy.

 

[London_Calling]

Then when no evidence can be found and the suspects are released we all go, "told you so, just picking on some poor chaps because they happen to be Pakistani Muslims".

I don't think anyone's said they're being "picked on".

It's the manipulation by the Government and its agencies that's in issue, the desire to keep the public in a state of anxiety, and also grateful for the sterling work being done on our behalf even if it does mean curtailing civil rights . . .

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I think the salient point is not just that suspicion isn't court-tested proof, it's not necessarily anything. In any police investigation, people may at some point be suspected - but perhaps only to be ruled out later, or perhaps on the basis of information that's entirely wrong. The fact that somebody gets nicked doesn't just not mean they're guilty, it can quite often mean there didn't turn out to be anything on them - which itself doesn't mean the cops were wrong to nick them.

As I said earlier, that's not how it works now. To be arrested and held in prison for two weeks is already to have been found guilty. It is for the police to decide this level of guilt now – to be under suspicion is now a crime for which the penalty is up to a month in prison, and the police force is the judiciary in such cases.

 

[Zachor]

They had some intelligence on them, but intelligence is not the same as hard evidence that can be presented in a court.

Exactly the intelligence if presented in open court may have compromised future anti terrorist ops by disclosing or alluding to methods used by the security services.

From reading about this case in the press. MI5 and the Met did not want the suspects arrested, but were over ruled by the Greater Manchester Police on whose patch any planned attack would most likely have happened.

I can see GMP's position in this as if the Sec Servs had let the suspect individuals in and they slip past the sec servs and an atrocity happens then GMP management would be hauled over the coals for it while those orgs who could step back into the shadows would be not accountable.

It also does not help matters when the government comes out saying "a massive plot has been foiled" or when the press use their tame police for off the record briefings/quotes.

Yeah that sort of thing undermines anti terror ops as even if there is justification many people think 'what bit of sleaze is Brown trying to distract us from?' There does need to be better communication re anti terror ops.

Then when no evidence can be found and the suspects are released we all go, "told you so, just picking on some poor chaps because they happen to be Pakistani Muslims".

I don't believe for one minuite that these individuals were being picked on for being Pakistani Muslims. I don't believe that NO evidence was found but the intelligence possibly showed that there was dodgyness in planning which is very difficult to try in open court and therefore the next best way of dealing with the situation is to deport the individuals.

 

[Zachor]

I think the salient point is not just that suspicion isn't court-tested proof, it's not necessarily anything. In any police investigation, people may at some point be suspected - but perhaps only to be ruled out later, or perhaps on the basis of information that's entirely wrong. The fact that somebody gets nicked doesn't just not mean they're guilty, it can quite often mean there didn't turn out to be anything on them - which itself doesn't mean the cops were wrong to nick them.

But you can't be releasing people without charge and then deporting them because intelligence-officer-taps-nose. Not in a democracy.

I can see your point on this and maybe there is a case for Security Courts that sit in secret and test the evidence in such cases where an open court case may damage future security service operations.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

And maybe there's a case for saying the secret courts have no place in open societies.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I can see your point on this and maybe there is a case for Security Courts that sit in secret and test the evidence in such cases where an open court case may damage future security service operations.

Yep. Secret trials are the way forward. Definitely.

Our wise leaders would never abuse such a system. In fact, I'm handing over my DNA to them tomorrow and having CCTV fixed up in every room of my house so that I can help them check that I'm not up to no good.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Zachor, you may be too cowardly to want freedom, but some of us are not.

 

[Zachor]

And maybe there's a case for saying the secret courts have no place in open societies.

There is most definitely a case for that but what happens when having open trials in such cases endangers the open society which we all agree with?

 

[Zachor]

Yep. Secret trials are the way forward. Definitely.

Our wise leaders would never abuse such a system. In fact, I'm handing over my DNA to them tomorrow and having CCTV fixed up in every room of my house so that I can help them check that I'm not up to no good.

If there was a way of avoiding gross abuses of secret trials then I'd be in favour of them but there isn't the constitutional framework in this country unlike in some others which would act as a counterweight to secret trials for terrorist offences. Either way its a tricky question. In this case removing the miscreants especially when they have no connection with the UK is probably the least worst option in the current circumstances.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

There is most definitely a case for that but what happens when having open trials in such cases endangers the open society which we all agree with?

Who is telling you that this is the case? Is it the same people who lied to you in an attempt to get you to agree with the invasion of another country?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

In this case removing the miscreants especially when they have no connection with the UK is probably the least worst option in the current circumstances.

What wrong have they done?

 

[Zachor]

Zachor, you may be too cowardly to want freedom, but some of us are not.

I want freedom just as much as others do but we are under attack and sometimes you have to cut the security agencies some slack.

Personally we need a much better way of dealing with terrorists both home grown and imported. I don't want to see people bounced for no reason but neither do I want dodgy people given the benefit of the doubt and allowed in to kill and maim.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I want freedom just as much as others do

No, you don't.

 

[Zachor]

What wrong have they done?

the security services (I surmise) must have had information gained from sig int sources etc that showed these individuals who associating with others who are rightly under suspicion and also these individuals may have made suspect statements or may have done suspect actions.

The terrorists need 'clean hands' operatives to carry out their attacks maybe these 'students' were the clean hands that the terrrorists needed.

Its a difficult case I admit but removing them seems to be the least worst option.

 

[London_Calling]

Zachor - we're being lied to and manipulted every single day. Just take the ID card issue as a starting point. It's all a contrived nonsense.

 

[fogbat]

the security services (I surmise) must have had information gained from sig int sources etc that showed these individuals who associating with others who are rightly under suspicion and also these individuals may have made suspect statements or may have done suspect actions.

The terrorists need 'clean hands' operatives to carry out their attacks maybe these 'students' were the clean hands that the terrrorists needed.

Its a difficult case I admit but removing them seems to be the least worst option.

So the lack of evidence against them is actually the strongest evidence of all...

 

[Donna Ferentes]

There is most definitely a case for that but what happens when having open trials in such cases endangers the open society which we all agree with?

What happens then is that somebody is putting forward an argument which is probably specious and certainly deeply dangerous.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

the security services (I surmise) must have had information gained from sig int sources etc that showed these individuals who associating with others who are rightly under suspicion and also these individuals may have made suspect statements or may have done suspect actions.

Why do you surmise this? I strongly suspect that they made the whole thing up for political reasons. You have absolutely no way of showing that your interpretation is correct and mine incorrect.

 

[Zachor]

No, you don't.

Yes I do I just don't see how we can allow unfettered access into the UK to those who want to destroy freedoms.

It took centuries to reduce the influence of the Church on peoples lives, bring about gender and sexuality equality, to universalise education, create a broadly secular society. These freedoms were very dearly bought with blood sweat and tears. It would be madness to allow in those who want to destroy those freedoms that took so long to gain. It is especially mad to allow in those who publiclly state that that they hate the idea of freedom for women, for gays, of thought, of conscience.

Would you really want to live in the sort of society that Al Majhouroon and similar organisations want to create? I wouldn't no more than I'd want to live in a society organised on BNP lines.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

So the lack of evidence against them is actually the strongest evidence of all...

*hands self in*

 

[Zachor]

Zachor - we're being lied to and manipulted every single day. Just take the ID card issue as a starting point. It's all a contrived nonsense.

I agree we are b eing flammed about the ID card issue but that doesn't lessen the threat we face from clerical fascism.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

It would be madness to allow in those who want to destroy those freedoms that took so long to gain.

Why? Are people not capable of disagreeing with them?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Would you really want to live in the sort of society that Al Majhouroon and similar organisations want to create?

'cos that's what'll happen

 

[Zachor]

Why do you surmise this? I strongly suspect that they made the whole thing up for political reasons. You have absolutely no way of showing that your interpretation is correct and mine incorrect.

There is always this suspicion I agree but unless there is an obvious gross mismanagement of a situation (ie the Stockwell shooting) then you have to cut the security services some slack. They may well know more than us.