Internment Should Be Seriously Considered. Options

[x2lls]

We are in a state of war. Not the usual battalion against battalion, but war nonetheless.

Met Officer

[Simon Kirby]

We are in a state of war. Not the usual battalion against battalion, but war nonetheless.

Met Officer

Internment without trial sounds rather dangerous - if there is criminality then by all means prosecute it, but once we start locking up people because we don't like their views on mayors or allotments or whatever then we're no longer a free society.

[x2lls]

Internment without trial sounds rather dangerous - if there is criminality then by all means prosecute it, but once we start locking up people because we don't like their views on mayors or allotments or whatever then we're no longer a free society.

But it is not about others views on mayors and allotments is it?
It is about those who kill and maim on behalf of an ideology that is determined to undermine and eventually take over.

Tell me please, how would you deal with the current situation if you had the power to do so?

[Simon Kirby]

But it is not about others views on mayors and allotments is it?

Not yet, but I'm very uncomfortable with the idea of interning someone for something they may or may not think when there isn't the evidence to convict them of an actual crime, and even if I didn't have compassion for those we were interning enlightened self-interest would tell me that the things I think might eventually follow on the banned list.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

I mean, clucking bell, I'm both a socialist and trades-unionist so my name's right at the top of the list.

I can't agree that internment is anything but a really unhelpful suggestion and I think you just have to treat all criminality the same - detect and prosecute in the short term and address any root cause injustice.

[x2lls]

Not yet, but I'm very uncomfortable with the idea of interning someone for something they may or may not think when there isn't the evidence to convict them of an actual crime, and even if I didn't have compassion for those we were interning enlightened self-interest would tell me that the things I think might eventually follow on the banned list.


I mean, clucking bell, I'm both a socialist and trades-unionist so my name's right at the top of the list.

I can't agree that internment is anything but a really unhelpful suggestion and I think you just have to treat all criminality the same - detect and prosecute in the short term and address any root cause injustice.

Simon, your argument doesn't make sense to me in regard to idealistic morons mowing down people with vehicles and suicide bombing kids.
There are many on the suspect list through intelligence, and time and time again, they have proven to be exactly what they were suspected of being. The threat is real. It is nothing to do with whether you are trade unionist or anything else that is legal for that matter. We are talking about an organised attack on our very way of life. From what I read in your statement you are saying we should wait until someone gets killed in the most horrific way before we take action. For me prevention is far better than cure. We, as a population expect and must be provided with protection by our government and the tools at it's disposal. There would not be any 'banned list'. This is a very specific issue that HAS to be addressed.

As an aside, where the usual commentators that occupy this forum that are so vocal on many other subjects?

[Simon Kirby]

Simon, your argument doesn't make sense to me in regard to idealistic morons mowing down people with vehicles and suicide bombing kids.
There are many on the suspect list through intelligence, and time and time again, they have proven to be exactly what they were suspected of being. The threat is real. It is nothing to do with whether you are trade unionist or anything else that is legal for that matter. We are talking about an organised attack on our very way of life. From what I read in your statement you are saying we should wait until someone gets killed in the most horrific way before we take action. For me prevention is far better than cure. We, as a population expect and must be provided with protection by our government and the tools at it's disposal. There would not be any 'banned list'. This is a very specific issue that HAS to be addressed.

As an aside, where the usual commentators that occupy this forum that are so vocal on many other subjects?

I think the essential difference between us is that I don't see the problem of Islamic fanaticism as a widespread attack on the UK. I'm trying to be open minded about it and I recognise that when a terrorist atrocity is a possibility at any public venue then it is obviously a significant threat, but it is my perception that the threat is coming from a small number of alienated or otherwise derranged whack-jobs and in a free society there is always going to be that marginal threat from douche-bags of one variety or another and you deal with it by keeping it in proportion. The IRA was the last time our security was similarly threatened and for a decade I was used to my vehicle being searched for car bombs by armed police, but life went on and peace eventually prevailed. I have no idea how peace will ever return to the middle east but I think we could improve the situation in the UK if we didn't keep whacking that particular hornets' nest with such an inprudently large stick.