UK Concentration camps for Mussies?

User avatar
L'Emmerdeur
Posts: 6236
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:04 pm
About me: Yuh wust nightmaya!
Contact:

Re: UK Concentration camps for Mussies?

Post by L'Emmerdeur » Thu Jun 01, 2017 11:42 pm

JimC wrote:However, ISIS declares itself a state. If a jihadist pledges allegiance to that state, they are an enemy combatant, whose legal treatment legitimately differs from the treatment of civilians.


Who has recognised this 'state'? What country has declared war against the 'state of Daesh'? It seems you're trying to base an argument on international law here; Daesh is not party to any treaties, and doesn't exist as a state just because some zealots call their campaign of terror a 'state.'

If I and five other true believers clowns declare ourselves the 'State of Pains in the Arse' and proceed to engage in acts of violence, our acts are criminal, not acts of war. We don't become a state just because we've decided to call our organisation a state. When one of the members of our camorra is caught, the only legitimate way that the country can deal with him is via criminal law.

Leaving that aside, if a country has not declared war, nor even acknowledged that a state of war exists, then one of its citizens cannot legally be declared an 'enemy combatant' merely because it's a convenient way to circumvent the the legal protections due its citizens.

What you're essentially saying is that the countries of the world should let Daesh dictate the terms of engagement. If they say they're a state, and that their state is 'at war' with the rest of the world, then everybody has to acknowledge that, and give their members status as part of the legitimate armed forces of a state.
JimC wrote:And my main point still remains; although hopefully the majority of intelligence and police work that detects potential terror attacks will provide enough evidence for normal court proceedings, it is only too possible that the information received, although strongly indicating a terror plot, may fall into the grey area of insufficient evidence for normal court proceedings. In these rare and specific circumstances, given someone who in every real sense of the word is an enemy combatant, I would prefer the state to act, rather than remain paralysed by laws designed to protect its own citizens and allow innocents to die. So, do not categorise my intent as "let's round them all up and shove them in camps" but rather a nuanced argument about actions required in relatively rare but truly dangerous situations.
Would you care to actually lay out what 'real senses' pertain to defining a member of a terrorist organization as an 'enemy combatant' when no legitimate state of war exists?

You're proposing that a country can and should dispense with the rule of law in dealing with its own citizens if it serves a purpose that somebody has deemed worthy. No matter how nuanced the argument, I consider that unacceptable, which is the reason I strongly disagreed with Obama's decision to carry out an extrajudicial execution on Anwar al-Awlaki.

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 74173
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: UK Concentration camps for Mussies?

Post by JimC » Fri Jun 02, 2017 12:02 am

If such positions result in a mass bombing occurring that could have been prevented by some extra-judicial actions, then it represents a state in paralysis, unable to prevent the slaughter of its citizens by what is in effect a foreign power, whatever the laws may say.
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 39971
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: UK Concentration camps for Mussies?

Post by Brian Peacock » Fri Jun 02, 2017 1:24 am

I don't think the (just to annoy Hermit) 'legal niceties' of any nation should leave terrorists free to commit murder - nor do I think they currently do. The issue is about who is determined to be a terrorist, by what measure, by whom, etc, and whether speculative internment of 'persons of special interest' or, following the principles of war, declared 'enemies of the state', will i) lead to the objective enhancement of public safety, and ii) impact on the rights, freedoms, and protections of citizens.

Think about how one of the classic trolling routines goes: the troll describes a degenerate group, defines somebody into that group, and then attacks them on the basis of their presumed membership of that group. Any protestation can then be dismissed or waved away because the group has already been described as a bunch of shifty charlatans, hate-mongers, violent fanatics, inveterate liars, unpatriotic dissidents, the enemy, whatever. Now, accepting that Jihadi groups like ISIS actually are truly and horribly degenerate this matter rests, as I said, on who we are going to define into that group and deny certain rights and freedoms to on that basis; the hows and the whys. I would suggest that imagined possibilities are not the best basis for such determinations, for we can all imagine that those who vehement protest their innocence, who condemn outright the action of terrorist, and/or who claim to be peaceful, responsibile citizens could actually be lying to either/or fool us or save their own skin: "That's just what a true fanatic would say."

This strikes me as a kind of witch hunt in the making - and we all know that if the witch drowns on the ducking stool then they were innocent, but if they survive then we burn them. History shows us that casting a wide net to catch a few ugly fish never works out well, and usually leads to the abandonment of the project after the net has been expanded so far beyond its original scope as to become unworkable and, therefore, useless.

If we truly value our freedoms, our civil liberties, human rights, and, yes, our legal niceties, then we do not enhance or secure them by undermining them for political convenience.
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 74173
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: UK Concentration camps for Mussies?

Post by JimC » Fri Jun 02, 2017 1:37 am

I certainly don't want the scenario above. However, if someone is shown to have made a formal declaration of allegiance to ISIS, on tape, I would hope that the "legal niceties" would accept that as grounds for prosecution...

I don't want any witch hunt based on supposition, I want terrorist acts prevented. Hopefully, most of the time, the evidence about an individuals terrorist planning will allow a standard arrest and prosecution in any case. I'm purely concerned with the (probably rare) situations where the evidence is there, but technically inadmissible, and where not acting on it could cost lives...
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 25806
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
About me: Cantankerous grump
Location: Ignore lithpt
Contact:

Re: UK Concentration camps for Mussies?

Post by Hermit » Fri Jun 02, 2017 2:14 am

JimC wrote:I certainly don't want the scenario above. However, if someone is shown to have made a formal declaration of allegiance to ISIS, on tape, I would hope that the "legal niceties" would accept that as grounds for prosecution...
A formal declaration of allegiance to ISIS is a punishable (Imprisonment for 3 years) offence under the Australian anti-terrorism legislation. In fact, a formal declaration of allegiance is not even necessary. Mere association with a person who is a member of, or a person who promotes or directs the activities of, an organisation carries that same penalty. (102.8 of the Criminal Code, as amended in August 2004)

Anti-Terrorism legislation has been further expanded several times since then, most recently with the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2016. I suggest you familiarise yourself with at least some of the details. It might stop you from digging yourself deeper into that "legal niceties" hole you're in.
Last edited by Hermit on Fri Jun 02, 2017 2:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 74173
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: UK Concentration camps for Mussies?

Post by JimC » Fri Jun 02, 2017 2:19 am

Good info, thanks Hermit. I wonder if this applies in the UK, given that's where the OP came from...
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 25806
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
About me: Cantankerous grump
Location: Ignore lithpt
Contact:

Re: UK Concentration camps for Mussies?

Post by Hermit » Fri Jun 02, 2017 2:23 am

JimC wrote:I wonder if this applies in the UK, given that's where the OP came from...
My guess is that counter-terrorism legislation is very similar in most western democracies. Perhaps you could do a little research to back your assertions up.

Also, I added to my previous post. Check it out, please.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 74173
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: UK Concentration camps for Mussies?

Post by JimC » Fri Jun 02, 2017 2:27 am

:lay:
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
pErvinalia
On the good stuff
Posts: 60767
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
Location: dystopia
Contact:

Re: UK Concentration camps for Mussies?

Post by pErvinalia » Fri Jun 02, 2017 2:30 am

JimC wrote:If such positions result in a mass bombing occurring that could have been prevented by some extra-judicial actions, then it represents a state in paralysis, unable to prevent the slaughter of its citizens by what is in effect a foreign power, whatever the laws may say.
Why are innocent deaths at the hands of ISIS any worse than the far greater number of deaths through domestic violence?
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 74173
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: UK Concentration camps for Mussies?

Post by JimC » Fri Jun 02, 2017 2:43 am

pErvin wrote:
JimC wrote:If such positions result in a mass bombing occurring that could have been prevented by some extra-judicial actions, then it represents a state in paralysis, unable to prevent the slaughter of its citizens by what is in effect a foreign power, whatever the laws may say.
Why are innocent deaths at the hands of ISIS any worse than the far greater number of deaths through domestic violence?
Per death they are not, but at least we have some mechanisms (even if they clearly need improvement & more resources) to tackle the problem. Women can take out restraining orders (and sure, men who ignore them are not perhaps caught and dealt with as effectively as they should be), but it is possible to address the problem within the existing legal system, given the will and the resources (and better education about the problem etc.)

I am saying there are potential difficulties caused by the nature of our legal system in preventing terrorist-caused deaths, and that the question needs to be looked at squarely. I am not, in spite of what hermit might think, attempting to be the reincarnation of Attila the Hun... :tea:
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
Jason
Destroyer of words
Posts: 17782
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 12:46 pm
Contact:

Re: UK Concentration camps for Mussies?

Post by Jason » Fri Jun 02, 2017 2:48 am

pErvin wrote:
JimC wrote:If such positions result in a mass bombing occurring that could have been prevented by some extra-judicial actions, then it represents a state in paralysis, unable to prevent the slaughter of its citizens by what is in effect a foreign power, whatever the laws may say.
Why are innocent deaths at the hands of ISIS any worse than the far greater number of deaths through domestic violence?
There's even less outcry about the thousands of civilians killed by the US and its allies every year in unilateral actions that allegedly "fight" terror.

User avatar
pErvinalia
On the good stuff
Posts: 60767
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
Location: dystopia
Contact:

Re: UK Concentration camps for Mussies?

Post by pErvinalia » Fri Jun 02, 2017 2:55 am

JimC wrote:
pErvin wrote:
JimC wrote:If such positions result in a mass bombing occurring that could have been prevented by some extra-judicial actions, then it represents a state in paralysis, unable to prevent the slaughter of its citizens by what is in effect a foreign power, whatever the laws may say.
Why are innocent deaths at the hands of ISIS any worse than the far greater number of deaths through domestic violence?
Per death they are not, but at least we have some mechanisms (even if they clearly need improvement & more resources) to tackle the problem. Women can take out restraining orders (and sure, men who ignore them are not perhaps caught and dealt with as effectively as they should be), but it is possible to address the problem within the existing legal system, given the will and the resources (and better education about the problem etc.)
I actually think the situation with domestic violence is more or less exactly the same as your terrorism concern. The law in terms of domestic violence seems horribly inadequate to deal with that violence. It would be easy to argue for the expansion of such extra-judicial laws as you favour to the domestic violence realm. And then to what other realms?
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 74173
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: UK Concentration camps for Mussies?

Post by JimC » Fri Jun 02, 2017 2:55 am

Śiva wrote:
pErvin wrote:
JimC wrote:If such positions result in a mass bombing occurring that could have been prevented by some extra-judicial actions, then it represents a state in paralysis, unable to prevent the slaughter of its citizens by what is in effect a foreign power, whatever the laws may say.
Why are innocent deaths at the hands of ISIS any worse than the far greater number of deaths through domestic violence?
There's even less outcry about the thousands of civilians killed by the US and its allies every year in unilateral actions that allegedly "fight" terror.
A separate issue. Important, and worth examining for sure, but not relevant to decisions on how to prevent terrorist actions in Britain or Australia. The argument can be made that the deaths you allude to foster further recruitment to the terrorist cause, but ISIS would still pursue its murderous aims even if the west undertook no actions that could ever harm civilians. And, by such a restriction in military action, it might be argued that ISIS would be able to develop its military strength without interference, ending up being an even bigger threat.
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 74173
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: UK Concentration camps for Mussies?

Post by JimC » Fri Jun 02, 2017 3:02 am

pErvin wrote:

...The law in terms of domestic violence seems horribly inadequate to deal with that violence. It would be easy to argue for the expansion of such extra-judicial laws as you favour to the domestic violence realm. ..
The law would be much more effective if sufficient resources were devoted to a combination of better education, early intervention and more effective police action against men (and some women) who are starting on the early road to violence towards their partners, or who ignore restraining orders.

Perhaps a better attack against my contention would be to make a similar argument about counter-terrorism; instead of any extra-judicial actions, try pouring more resources into intelligence gathering, surveillance (with judicial oversight) and police in general. Whether that would be enough to reduce the likelihood of terror attacks to the same extent as detention without trial of those jihadists with a clear murderous agenda is a moot point...
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 25806
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
About me: Cantankerous grump
Location: Ignore lithpt
Contact:

Re: UK Concentration camps for Mussies?

Post by Hermit » Fri Jun 02, 2017 5:46 am

JimC wrote:
pErvin wrote:Why are innocent deaths at the hands of ISIS any worse than the far greater number of deaths through domestic violence?
...we have some mechanisms (even if they clearly need improvement & more resources) to tackle the problem. Women can take out restraining orders (and sure, men who ignore them are not perhaps caught and dealt with as effectively as they should be), but it is possible to address the problem within the existing legal system, given the will and the resources (and better education about the problem etc.)
You could say pretty much the same about terrorism.
JimC wrote:I am not, in spite of what hermit might think, attempting to be the reincarnation of Attila the Hun... :tea:
Attila the Hun? No way. Unlike you, Attila was not given the opportunity of advocating the whiteanting of habeas corpus. Hitler, on the other hand... :ddpan:
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 11 guests