Just realised that for the first time ever (I think) I'm cheering on the Tories against Labour!

[Caligula]

OMG I'm going to have to rush out and buy a union jack and get my hair done in a blue rinse. I found myself saying during PM "Good on yer, Tories" about them not supporting the 90 days extension this evening.

Do I have to move to Surrey now?

[moondog]

I don't think it's wrong tm. I'm all for it.
France has just said that they will kick out foreigners misbehaving,so I heard tonight on CNN.

Excellent.

[Tinker]

Because 90 days is a pretty long time. Many previous arrestees have been released without charge (some would argue 90 days wouldgive time to get evidenc to charge them, others would say that they would, most likely, have been released eventually anyway)

90 days could result in the loss of job, home, reputation.

A lot of arrests for "terrorism" can be due to malicious reports to police (no stats for this, am speculating, but, I don't think, wildly)

[peacedove]

Horray for the Blair defeat

Maybe the erosion of civil liberties will slow down now, if not end altogether.

[Tinker]

Have a look at today's Indie front page - covers the arguments for this very well.

[aloha]

Imprisonment without trial is how dictatorships work. It is the ultimate breach of our human rights IMO.

[Nightynight]

tiredemma - how would your family cope if you were locked up without charges for 90 days? What would it do to you and them? Dx was arrested and held for a few hours last year, it was not on a terrorist charge, but a complaint made by a loony member of the public. Completely without foundation, and was dropped. The children were taken by social services, our house was searched, and we were shouted at by the police as though we were scum, lowlife, criminals.. .in fact, we were the only victims. Make no mistake about it, having a memeber of your family arrested is no joke.

Now look at the stats of % of terrorist suspects arrested, who were eventually charged with terrorist activity (and I mean terrorist activity, not some visa irregularity), and you'll see why people are a bit alarmed at the thought that the police can have a free hand to lock people up for 90 days. Because what is likely to happen is that loads of high profile arrests will be made every time the press have whipped up public fears a bit more. the nature of terrorism is that arresting a load of people and locking them up for 90 days, sadly, isn't likely to prevent another terrorist attack.

[Nightynight]

moondog, thats just talk, most of them are french born!

[moondog]

OMG

Peacedove is back!!!

AAARGHHHHHHH!!!!!

[tiredemma]

thanks, feel embarrased for my ignorance, i had only caught a few news stories about it and those were of the police and blair discussing the benefits of it.

thanks for explaining it to me. Agree its not the way forward in a democratic society.

[peacedove]

RTKangaMummy,

[quote]Taking the actual politics out of the equation for a minute

IMHO I think that the 90 rule should have been enforced for terrorists. [/quote]

OK, but how do you propose to decide who is a terrorist before holding him/her for 90 days. Shouldn't a detention for investigation be for a reasonable period, not for so long that an innocent person's life is destroyed.

[piffle]

And even the backing of the much retgarded political newspaper "The Sun" could not swing it for him eh...

[moondog]

You people forget that these measures are necessary because there are a great many people who do not believe in democracy and do their utmost to destroy democratic (albeit imperfect)
societies.

PD could fill you in.

[piffle]

We're not suggesting that anyone who can be charged with a terrorist offence or someone who has proven links or membership of a banned group should not be detained - well I'm not for instance.
A British Guantanamo Bay anyone ?
From FIL It was bad enough being Irish during the worst of the troubles and living in England, the restrictions just because you were Irish meant you could be detained at leisure because you did not "look" right. He moved to Dubai where they were more tolerant! An Arab nation fancy that.

No one here is saying that terrorism should not be fought against, but we are a democracy and a good democary does not arrest let alone detain in jail anyone without a whole sheaf of evidence prior to apprehending them.
Look at Roy Whiting who murdered Sarah Payne - even he was not detained though all the police knew he had done it. They had to collect the evidence!
Innocent until - proven guilty- that's the backbone of our judiciary.
It will be open season on any muslim or Arab appeaaring (or Brazilians of course) who expresses an opinion against the west.
Who is naive enough to think that locking up suspected terrorists would change the reasons why they want to attack us.
George bloody Bush, you're either with us or against us?
Well I'm not with him that's for bloody sure.

[sis]

I don't agree with a some of the things you've posted in the past but welcome back peacedove.

[Caligula]

What a defeat. How glorious. I'm so pleased! My hair is getting darker and my voice is going higher...

[piffle]

Moving to Surrey are you now, Caligula?

[lilibet]

Wasn't the old man who shouted 'rubbish' at the labout party conference arrested under the terrorism act?

so under Tone's wishes they could have held him for 90 days?

[Caligula]

Yep.

It just seems so bizarre to me that nobody remembers the Guildford Four and the Birmingham Six. Talk about not learning from history.

The depressing thing is that if the Tories were in government, of course they'd be calling for 90 days and Labour would be thundering about civil liberties. What exactly is it about power which so changes people's viewpoints, or are they all just pretending?

[aloha]

I am appalled by the new legislation, and the religious hatred bill. Our civil liberties are under threat every day. I never, ever in a zillion years thought I'd be grateful for a Tory revival.

[edam]

Locking up innocent people doesn't protect anyone - it just causes even more suffering and injustice. This is just a despicable piece of PR designed to make the Government and the police look as if they are doing something. (That's a comment on Ian Blair, by the way, not ordinary police officers.)

The people they falsely accused of the so-called ricin plot (when actually no ricin ever existed) were held for far more than 90 days under existing legislation - held on other charges while investigations continued. Anyone detained in a democracy has the right to be charged or released. And then all but one were quite properly released after being found not guilty by a jury. Demonstrating quite how badly wrong the police and prosecutors can get it. All that time and millions of pounds wasted harming innocent people rather than finding and dealing with the real threat.

Changing the law in this way would place us in more danger, not less. It would be wrong, and it would be stupid. But hey, at least it would make Tony look as if he was doing something.

[edam]

Bloody hell, democracy lives! He's been defeated!

bbcnews

[Cam]

The Guildford 4 and the Birmingham 6 were miscarriages of justice by the police hence the advent of the CPS.

Labour govts always erode civil liberties, they're totalitarians, I hate them.

Don't get me wrong though I'm not right wing either, but I could never vote Labour.

[Janh]

Tory Govts never do of course, Cam.

[Cam]

Can't disagree Janh but Labour are not what people think they are

[aloha]

I didn't vote Labour btw. I voted Lib Dem as I agree with their (actually far more liberal and left wing) policies.