Pre-emptive arrests and holding of suspected terrorists?

Deluxe1 · 4 Jul 2007 at 12:12

Following on from the latest terrorist attacks i heard on the radio this morning that some of these people were already on "watch lists" but without them actually getting caught committing a crime there was nothing that could have been done.

So would it be acceptable to arrest and hold "suspected terrorists" indefinitely in this country even tho they havent been charged?

Gilly · 4 Jul 2007 at 12:14

Yas786 · 4 Jul 2007 at 12:16

Gilly said:
No

What he said, it would be a highly stupid move on the part of the authorities to do such a thing. The uproar would be tremendous and possibly cause more conflict than we have now.

JohnnyG · 4 Jul 2007 at 12:18

We had internment in the '70s for IRA suspects, it didn't work then and it's probably less likely to work now with all the HR laws.

colinuk · 4 Jul 2007 at 12:20

If they did it quietly, without anyone finding out, how would we know.... maybe they do already..... we wouldnt know.

But no, as a general rule, put yourself in the posistion of the person being held for no reason for no offecene and for no disernable amount of time, kind of sucks. Bit like my spelling

platypus · 4 Jul 2007 at 12:21

If anything, it would simply play into the terrorists hands even more. A bad idea.

iCraig · 4 Jul 2007 at 12:29

Deluxe1 said:
So would it be acceptable to arrest and hold "suspected terrorists" indefinitely in this country even tho they havent been charged?

No, it wouldn't. If we don't know or can't prove they've done anything wrong, who are we to detain them?

Deluxe1 · 4 Jul 2007 at 12:34

iCraig said:
No, it wouldn't. If we don't know or can't prove they've done anything wrong, who are we to detain them?

Well you don`t get put on a "suspected terrorist watch list" for nothing do you?

Take the recent attacks for example,what if they had killed tens of people i`m sure there would have been a uproar that nothing was done when they knew they were already terror suspects...

magick · 4 Jul 2007 at 12:40

Deluxe1 said:
So would it be acceptable to arrest and hold "suspected terrorists" indefinitely in this country even tho they havent been charged?

No because that opens the door to a police state and dictatership because arguments can be made that anyone who doesn't fully support the government/state and its will is a potential terroist and should be detained without charge to 'prevent' them from carrying out subversive activities which could anything as sinistar and dangerous as blowing something up to something as trivial but annoying as running a blog exposing corruption and incompatance in the government.

iCraig · 4 Jul 2007 at 12:42

Deluxe1 said:
Well you don`t get put on a "suspected terrorist watch list" for nothing do you?

Obviously not. Suspcious activity will get MI5's attention but they won't move in unless they have enough evidence to sentance. I'm sure plenty of people have been monitored by MI5, but subsquently dropped after the suspect acitivity was explained. Not very fair for those to have been detained and interrogated for an indeterminable amount of time.

Deluxe1 said:
Take the recent attacks for example,what if they had killed tens of people i`m sure there would have been a uproar that nothing was done when they knew they were already terror suspects...

But just because you suspect someone, it doesn't mean they should be immediately arrested. MI5's main job is National Security, and in order to do that on the most effective scale they need to pin suspects with enough evidence and get rid of them, otherwise they simply run the risk of acting too soon and scaring the cell underground. Then you have a terror cell wise to Britain's observations running unchecked somewherein the country.

Shackley · 4 Jul 2007 at 12:46

Deluxe1 said:
Well you don`t get put on a "suspected terrorist watch list" for nothing do you?

No idea . . . from where do you get your knowledge of how people get on a "suspected terrorist watch list"?

I would have thought that mobile 'phone records would be a start point, people to whom you send or from whom you receive emails and so on. A pretty wide net really.

What would you do, pre-emptively arrest and hold all employees of Amazon?

I heard that many years ago, following an IRA bombing in Germany, everyone travelling to the UK from Holland in a VW Camper Van over a period of days was added to a "suspected terrorist watch list".

magick · 4 Jul 2007 at 13:02

Should just add what this country doesn't need is detention without trial it just needs to seriously re-evaluate it's immigration policy and all the islamic immigrants already here and be honest about the downfalls of multi-culturalism.

Judge Mortis · 4 Jul 2007 at 13:05

I am not in favour of indefinite detention for suspected terrorists but it is such a tough call if that person they suspect goes on to commit an act of terrorism where lives are put at risk or people are killed.

The current 28 day detention period under the Terrorism Act should be re-evaluated though. Terrrorism is a different ball game to mainstream crime and that different ball game needs different rules.

Slinwagh · 4 Jul 2007 at 13:33

magick said:
Should just add what this country doesn't need is detention without trial it just needs to seriously re-evaluate it's immigration policy and all the Islamic immigrants already here and be honest about the downfalls of multi-cultural ism.

And how does that cover terrorist who were born in this country?

Yas786 · 4 Jul 2007 at 13:36

Slinwagh said:
And how does that cover terrorist who were born in this country?

It doesnt but lets not let that get in the way of the usual 'bash the immigrants' type of response in here.

scorza · 4 Jul 2007 at 13:37

JohnnyG said:
We had internment in the '70s for IRA suspects, it didn't work then and it's probably less likely to work now with all the HR laws.

OTOH, we had internment for people of recent German descent during WW2 and it worked as intended. Its all about how much will to win we as a society have. Sadly I think at the moment we're decidedly lacking

dirtydog · 4 Jul 2007 at 13:39

scorza said:
OTOH, we had internment for people of recent German descent during WW2 and it worked as intended. Its all about how much will to win we as a society have. Sadly I think at the moment we're decidedly lacking

That was a totally different situation. It was a war with a clearly defined enemy, and with a definite end. The current 'war' has no end and the enemy are not clearly defined. Obviously we cannot intern all Muslims just in case one of them decides to commit terrorism.

I do not agree with the current clamour to raise the detention to 90 days.

Reading the gutter press you would think that this was some sort of magic bullet, panacea solution to the problem.

magick · 4 Jul 2007 at 13:39

Slinwagh said:
And how does that cover terrorist who were born in this country?

Well you can't unless you want to deport/expell british born muslims which I think if things keep heading in the direction they are, could possibly become a reality in the near future.

jas72 · 4 Jul 2007 at 13:43

Nope we can do nothing but educate people start by banning schools based on religion for one.

SiD the Turtle · 4 Jul 2007 at 13:46

Deluxe1 said:
So would it be acceptable to arrest and hold "suspected terrorists" indefinitely in this country even tho they havent been charged?

No, in my opinion you cannot defend our hard fought ideals of liberty and freedom by taking them away...

However, do we do that already? I forget the laws that Labour brought in, but weren't there those cases of men arrested, taken away for months and then released without charge?