Terror Plot Foiled

dirtydog said:
They have the right to a trial to determine whether they are guilty of treason or terrorism though, I think you would agree. That's a British thing :)

Some in this thread seem to be advocating capital punishment for people merely accused of a crime. That's the sort of thing they do in Muslim countries is it not.
Click to expand...


Its more then "Accused" These guys would have been under months of surveillance, How else did they stop these attacks?
They have the liquids and what ever they were going to use. Thats enough evidence for me.
 
dirtydog said:
They have the right to a trial to determine whether they are guilty of treason or terrorism though, I think you would agree. That's a British thing :)

Some in this thread seem to be advocating capital punishment for people merely accused of a crime. That's the sort of thing they do in Muslim countries is it not.
Click to expand...

Ironic, aint it?

The mass advocacy of capital punishment for people suspected of a crime is seen as a way to combat a perceived barbaric regime.
 
Zip said:
Its more then "Accused" These guys would have been under months of surveillance, How else did they stop these attacks?
They have the liquids and what ever they were going to use. Thats enough evidence for me.
Click to expand...

Then presumably there is enough evidence to put them on trial?
 
AcidHell2 said:
Why do people seem surprised that the rrested where of pakistan origin.

SInce IRA disbanned there has been no white terrorist cells in the UK.
Click to expand...
Wrong: animal rights nutters have bombed buildings and attacked people.
 
Sleepy said:
Treason is an anachronism, nowadays you get charged with murder, terrorism, espionage etc you don't get charged with treason.

As to them having rights when do you take them away, upon suspicion that they are committing an offence, upon arrest, upon conviction, or when some keyboard warrior pontificates.
Click to expand...

Upon Arrest of course :)
 
Wow Zip I hope you're never on a jury passing judgement over me... you'd probably have already decided I must be guilty based on the fact that the police think I am.
 
Zip said:
Pffft, Human Rights Act :rolleyes:

People that commit treason and cause terrorism dont deserve to have rights.
Click to expand...

Interesting idea that we covered in a thread on Communitarianism in SC... Human Rights are an idea that dictate a standard by which society should treat humans, but what should happen to that social contract when an inidvidual deliberately attempts to subvert those standards and launch a significant attack on the society that would afford them those rights?

Perhaps the concept of Human Rights should be revised, rather than a standard by which people intrinsicly deserve to be treated, they should be replaced with a concept of situations that it would not be good for society to place a person in (i.e. it wouldn't be good for society to torture others as a matter of practice, it isn't good for society or the individual) the emphasis of Human Rights should be shifted from the inidividual to society in general...
 
Last edited:
Visage said:
Then presumably there is enough evidence to put them on trial?
Click to expand...

But why should they need to put them on trial anyway? They know what they were planning and they know what they were going to do and they caught them pretty much red handed.
I dont think a trial should be necessary
 
Zip said:
But why should they need to put them on trial anyway? They know what they were planning and they know what they were going to do and they caught them pretty much red handed.
I dont think a trial should be necessary
Click to expand...

"They knew" Saddam had WMDs which could be launched in 15 minutes, but "they" were wrong.

Do you oppose the concept of trial by jury on principle, or just for terrorism cases?
 
Last edited:
cleanbluesky said:
Interesting idea that we covered in a thread on Communitarianism in SC... Human Rights are an idea that dictate a standard by which society should treat humans, but what should happen to that social contract when an inidvidual deliberately attempts to subvert those standards and launch a significant attack on the society that would afford them those rights?
Click to expand...
A just society holds to its own standards even if rejected by the accused.
 
MookJong said:
It's just not that simple though. I would agree with you if the plot was to put bombs on planes and watch them blow up. But I'm pretty sure the intention of the plot would be for them to die in the planes too.

Just because your scum doesn't mean mean your willing to take your own life. They were called cowards earlier in this thread but again I don't agree. What on earth would drive you to take yours and others lives in this way?

It's belief, they actually believe in what they are doing, this is the most shocking thing for me.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with you about belief, what could possibly drive young men to throw away their lives for something that is nothing to do with them, they mustv'e pretty effectively brainwashed to believe that something that has nothing to do with them is worth dying for and killing a lot of innocent people over. God willing their handlers are caught and dealt with as severly as the bombers are

But for all the brainwashing they must've surely realised what they were doing was wrong, but wanted to do it anyway, that what I meant when calling them scum
 
I can't help but think that our invasion of Iraq has contributed towards 'British' Muslims anger and intentions to blow us up.

I can't say i'm shocked that the arrested are British born Muslims. The enemy has been within for the last decade or so, they have just been looking for 'justification' for their actions. Whilst not all Muslims are terrorists, most terrosrists are Muslim.
 
Forget all the political nonsence, my family are stuck in Spain at the back of a 100 yard BA queue. They have more chance of getting struck by lightning than catching a flight today.

That gives me one more day to cover up the giant party I had at home a few days ago :)
 
Zip said:
But why should they need to put them on trial anyway? They know what they were planning and they know what they were going to do and they caught them pretty much red handed.
I dont think a trial should be necessary
Click to expand...

Well I, and hopefully the majority think a trial is necessary. Your thinking is dangerous.
 
Zip said:
But why should they need to put them on trial anyway? They know what they were planning and they know what they were going to do and they caught them pretty much red handed.
I dont think a trial should be necessary
Click to expand...

Have you heard of the Birmingham 6?

The Guildford 4?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom