Monday, 14 April 2008

Terror Error?

A Home Office minister says he believes plans to extend detention of terror suspects will get through Parliament - saying he thinks MPs "will buy it". Under the new proposals, the home secretary would be able to immediately extend the detention limit of a suspect from 28 to 42 days, as long as it was supported by a joint report by a chief constable and the director of public prosecutions.

The extension would then have to be approved by the Commons and the Lords within 30 days. But if either House voted against it, the power would end at midnight on the day of the debate.

My arithmetic is not legend, but it seems to me that if a suspect is held for 28 days and a proposed extension of 14 days has to be approved within 30 days of the application, the suspect would be free before the extension could be either approved or rejected.

In any case, I don't see what all the fuss is about. If the authorities can't beat the information out of them in 28 days is another 2 weeks really going to make any difference?

And with all the invasion of privacy rights and electronic hardware at their disposal, how come they haven't built a watertight case before arresting the suspect in the first place?

7 comments:

haddock said...

Now then Pagar the Not Very Nice cause he is not Really Brave Enough to be Horrible.
Let us see how you can debate.

Here for the benefit of your reader is your comment made on another blog.

"Actually I found Haddocks blog quite entertaining and it is the ultimate argument for complete freedom of speech. Why don't we get this sort of stuff in the MSM?

I get the impression that by allowing him to get his homophobic racist views off his chest it has probably saved some homosexual from being rolled or some child molested."

I have challenged you to justify this outrageous slur but you, being a coward, have not responded. Now, you can respond here or on my blog. You can show your readership your debating prowess or you can just delete this comment and show just me that you are a loathsome coward who hides behind DK's skirts.

Now then, put up or apologise and shut up.

pagar said...

OK Haddy, lets get to it.

What have I said that was wrong?

Presumably you don't deny that you are a homophobe and a racist? That would be absurd and indeed you are proud to air your views on your blog.

I have no problem with this. A lot of people are homophobes and racists and my point is that if we didn't live in a society where our freedom of speech is constrained, a lot more of these views would be expressed, even in the mainstream media.

And I believe this would be healthy for everyone. If homophobes were allowed to express their views freely as you have done, I believe they would be less inclined to use physical violence to express their disapproval. Similarly racists.

That immigrants who refuse to integrate into our society should be forcibly repatriated is a widely held view but it is barely legal to express it. That is wrong.

My child molester remark was based on your apparent request that when they go, the immigrants leave behind their little girls. You rightly point out that the context to this remark is unknown and if you meant something else I withdraw it (though I am concerned that you seem to fantasise that Kay Tie is a 14 year old girl and that you are putting her to bed).

But Haddy.

Each to his own.

haddock said...

Perhaps you should check some facts and do some research before shouting your mouth off. Your comments are completely out of order and you should know that.
As I said, put up or shut up. the great thing about blogging is that references and quotes to back an argument can be linked to back up any point of view. You posit the idea that any 'homophobe' is necessarily a 'queer basher' and wishes to harm them. If you can produce any evidence to back up this claim then let us see it. Otherwise it is a disgusting thing to suggest about anyone. The child molesting claim is even worse, disgusting is too light a word it is quite shameful. If you try to excuse your remarks by saying I thought you meant.... reinforces my view that you are far more bigotted than I could possibly be.... leave the girls here.... they were unwanted by their parents... leave them here.... not a request for children to abuse you sick person, but that they might grow up in a society where girls have some value and can be loved and nurtured for who they are. To suggest that two children should remain here is not the suggestion of a racist. Did I suggest, or have I suggested, that ALL immigrants should be deported ?, I think not. Don't put words in my mouth I'm quite capable of doing it myself, I'm a grown up you see.
Some of us ARE grown-ups... some of us have brought up children and when they are packed off for bed (not put to bed) so that the grown-ups can talk it is not a prelude for child abuse. You have a sick mind. Perhaps you agree with her childish venom and spite.... ?
Of course in the culture of a large part of the sub-continent sleeping with a 14 year is thought to be a 'good idea' and 13yo schoolgirls are sent back 'home' for this purpose.
If you look through my blog you will find reference to the Dalits and the possible reason for 'racism' in the Big Brother fiasco. I have concerns about race and culture, you would be a fool not to if you love your country and your culture, I have no great problem with people who want to live here, take part, accept our customs and values.... I do have a problem with the colonisation of my country.

The Haddy thing is an indication of provocation and lack of respect for others, I suggested you didn't use it as it is childish, you persist as an annoyance; on my blog my response would be curt Anglo-saxon.... however this is your home so I will show some respect as I don't notice any swearing here.

You seem to be a new blogger, it seems at first sight that anarchy reigns on t'interweb but it doesn't.... there is an etiquette, if you need to demolish an argument swear curse and shout, if you like or don't if you don't like.... but back up your arguments in a debate. If you can find any published works to back up your claims then post it..... if you can't then pop over to DK's place and apologise,
(go on, there's a good lad)
ps.for example...."If the authorities can't beat the information out of them in 28 days".... source of information regarding violence in custody ?

pagar said...

OK Mr Haddock

Maybe someone who says "kick the selfish backward cunts out of our country back to their shithole of a country" is not expressing a racist viewpoint.

Maybe someone who uses the term "disgusting shirtlifter" is not a homophobe.

But I'd suggest if you object to these labels you should not use such language.

Logically, I accept that not every homophobe is a queer basher and yet it is obvious every queer basher is a homophobe. My point is that if the legislators did not attempt to curtail freedom of expression by banning the articulation of views they find offensive it is likely fewer homophobes would resort to violence.

Of course it is impossible to produce evidence to back this up but, in my experience, violence usually occurs when someone is frustrated by the inability to express themselves in any other way.

Finally, I have no wish to see anarchy on the web- just freedom for you to express your view that I an a "loathsome coward" or whatever. In fact, when I referred to you as "Haddy" last night it was not intended to show lack of respect but was a term of endearment. You see actually I quite like you.

And I'm not a poof!!!

PS If you want evidence that violence is used on terrorist suspects have a look at the photographs of the Birmingham Six following their arrest.

haddock said...

I see nothing particularly annoying about being called a racist or a homophobe. The homophobe word grates because it is a wrong use of language, phobia is an irrational fear.... I'm not afraid of them just don't like the idea of what they do.The calling of someone either in a debate is code for "I have run out of ideas in this argument".
"yet it is obvious every queer basher is a homophobe." oh no it isn't, you see that if I get bashed for looking at someone the wrong way, cutting someone up while driving or bumping into someone.... I have little redress. If I'm 'ethnic' or a poof, then all stops are pulled out to get a conviction because getting bashed if you are in these categories is most often seen to be because the victim is one of these minorities, not because they are just more annoying people... and the penalty will be higher. I could argue that I am therefore worth less than a minority.
I am a Christian and get my beliefs and culture trashed .... yet I'm on dodgy ground if I publicly trash Islam..... I am worth less than a minority.

I get cross about being judged as being worth less in my own country, history has shown both Christianity and the English as a force for good in the world.

wsxwhx610 said...

玩美女人視訊網 -
玩美女人視訊網 -
視訊聊天網 -
免費視訊聊天網 -
麻辣視訊聊天網 -
辣妹影音視訊聊天網 -
台灣甜心視訊聊天網 -
辣妹視訊聊天網 -
8dgo視訊聊天網 -
台灣情 kiss 色網 -
168視訊聊天網 -
影音美女視訊聊天網 -
後宮視訊聊天網 -
女人幫影音聊天室 -
啦咧影音聊天室 -
0204視訊交友 -
啦咧影音聊天室 rain -
桃園星願聊天室 -
啦咧影音聊天室 vista -
ut一夜激情成人聊天室 -
176s383 影音聊天室 -
玩美女人影音秀 -
影音聊天室lover99 -
173liveshow視訊美女 -
tvnet 影音聊天室 -
免費影音聊天室 -
hi 5 tv 影音聊天室 -
台中一夜激情聊天室 -
影音聊天室 no9 -
momokoko同學會影音聊天室大聯盟 -
同學會影音聊天室大聯盟 -
173 視訊辣妹 -

李蓉仲 said...

IS VERY GOOD..............................