posted 11-12- 01:41 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by BurkeyMK2:
people suspected of terrorism..

---

This is what you said Burkey, "suspected of terrorism", not "people talking to terrorists". There's a big difference!

Besides, if I was seen talking to a known terrorists I hope and expect to be asked some questions by law enforcement, even held for awhile until they check me out. How the hell else do you get information on these bastards if you don't ask questions of everyone who has dealings with them?

posted 11-12- 04:11 PM               

Why should I research what internment means in Ireland? You are the one complaining about it. You are the one posting it as a topic. Why can't you say what it really means? What you are really complaining about?

Where did I say I wanted to be abused?

Interrogated for something I know nothing about? Why not? That's how the authorities discover that you know nothing...by asking. Or are the authorities in Ireland mind readers.

Look, if I'm seen hangin' with bin Laden, I expect to be picked up and interrogated. Wouldn't you? Or would you rather complain about your civil rights being abused while people are being blown up? Like that 17 year old who blew himself up with a pipe bomb in N. Ireland a couple days ago. Fortunately it was just him. Maybe if he had been "interned" he would still be alive.

posted 11-12- 04:49 PM            

The dictionary defines internment as: indefinite detention without charge or trial.
"In the early hours of Monday 9th August 1971, I was kidnapped from my bed by armed men, taken away and held as a hostage for five and a half weeks. I was not in Uruguay, Brazil, Greece or Russia. I was in the United Kingdom, an hour's flight from London. I was in Belfast." (John McGuffin, Internment, Anvil Books, 1973)

What happened to John McGuffin that morning was nothing new in Ireland; but the scale of the detentions was. 342 men were picked up in the initial sweep, of whom 226 were detained. By the end of the year, 1,576 people had been seized, of whom less than 1,000 had been released. The remainder were held in Magilligan prison, on the prison ship "Maidstone", and in Long Kesh concentration camp. Internees were routinely maltreated and tortured as part of British Army intelligence-gathering, a fact later acknowledged by the European Commission on Human Rights. The internees were soon known in song as "The Men Behind the Wire".

posted 11-12- 05:14 PM               

Now that you have defined it, are you saying that England is today doing what they did 30 years ago? That they have started "internment" again including the prison ships and torture? That they are doing what they admitted had failed before and was acknowledged as illegal?

Since your definition, and that of the website, define "internment" as something that happened 30 years ago, you still haven't explained what's pissing you off today.

If you want to continue making this a personal attack then fine. I'll be happy to stoop to your level. In the meantime why don't you reign in your own "mind full of hate" and explain what's behind your initial post. Your topic is "UK reintroduces internment" but you didn't say what internment was (now you have) and you haven't said what you mean by "reintroduces".

Other than that, you have been perfectly clear.

posted 11-12- 05:43 PM            

Reintroduces Internment means reintroduces internment - what needs to be explained? Will it involve torture and prison ships, who knows? I'm sure it wasn't described as such 30 yrs ago. My inital point was that people in N.Ireland would not be happy to hear this, now you know why.

posted 11-12- 06:52 PM               

Rounding up suspected terrorists? So are we! Holding them longer than 24 hours? So are we! Are the Brits trying to defend themselves against terrorists from another country? So are we! Are the Brits caught in the middle of war based on religious differences? So are we!

Does it really make any difference if the terrorists are hiding in an Afghan cave or in a Belfast pub? Just because an IRA terrorist may be your neighbor doesn't make him any less a terrorist. Unless of course you agree with him???

Are you also against what America is doing internally in it's own country to find and stop terrorism?

What are the Brits doing that we in the US aren't?

If the US is truely going to attack worldwide terrorism this is going to include Irish terrorists too. Britain is helping us against our terrorist threat, it is only right that we help them. Terrorism is terrorism no matter who perpetrates it and no matter what the reason is.

Injustice? Our Supreme Court ruled years ago that the US Constitution is not a suicide pact, that we as a nation can not allow ourselves to be attacked in the name of protecting civil liberties. In time of war, civil liberties sometimes suffer.

When you say the people of N. Ireland won't be happy with what the Brits are doing (whatever it is), do you mean all the people or just the Catholics? Are you saying that both the minority Catholics and the majority Protestants are against whatever actions the Brits are taking?

While you're posting pictures of tortured IRA suspects, why don't you post some pictures of body parts from British soldiers that the IRA has blown up.

posted 11-12- 08:30 PM               

Yes, as it occured 30 years ago, it was. And the Japanese and Germans did worse, but 30 years after the war they were our close allies. And you say you don't hate?

To detain somebody indefinately without trial is WRONG.

Even if they have information that could save lives and they refuse to talk? In time of war? We (Americans) hold people without bail all the time until their trial if they are deemed dangerous to the community or likely to flee. It's not one of the Ten Commandments - "Thou shalt not hold a person more than 24 hours without a trial under any circumstances."

i could post pictures of IRA victims but they would be irelevant here.

If it's not relevent why did you post a link to a picture of someone tortured 30 years ago?

You believe that a government has the right to do that to a man because someone from his 'community' commited an act of terrorism?.

No, the example you gave earlier was talking to a terrorist in a pub, socializing with him. Socializing with a terrorist and living in the same community are two different things.

You seem to be suggesting that I somehow support the IRA; I think I have stated elsewhere on this forum that that is not the case. I never have, and never will support or condone any action taken by those thugs. Look at it this way Jerry, if white, middle class, US/UK whatever citizens where commiting acts of terror, would you sacrifice your son to internment? Would you sacrifice yourself, believing that it was for the greater good?

If my son or I were associating with terrorists, or refused to share knowledge that we had about them, then we deserve to be held and questioned. Interned? You need to tell me the circumstances under which the Brits are currently "interning" people indefitely before I can go beyond that.

Human rights are a 'basement' level, not a 'ceiling'. you cant drop below them whenever it suits...

Not at all costs. If someone is trying to kill me then fuck his human rights if that's the only way to stop him.

Come back when some IRA terrorist gets out on a human rights technicality and then blows up your family and tell me how proud you are that his human rights were protected!

posted 11-12- 09:50 PM            

IF they have information, in many cases it appears that internees didn't have information, they were detained on INCORRECT information. Nothing suggests to me that modern internment should be any different.

To post pictures of IRA victims is irrelevant, our topic of discussion is internment of innocents, and I have simply used my precedent to illustrate my concerns. Why should an unconnected victim of internment be connected with victims of the IRA?

Socialising with somebody IS the same as living in the same community; in a relatively small area a local pub can attract many people, you may know a face and chat with somebody, you may not be aware that that person is a terrorist.

As for the analogy i made about yourself or your son, what if you didnt know you where associating with a terrorist? maybe your conversations involve nothing more than football?

i dont know how the british plan to intern people at present, I simply said in the beginning that they are to reintroduce internment; something which I believe is wrong.

As for some guy getting out on a technicality, I understand your concern, but i can also imagine how it would feel to have a father/mother/son whatever to be kidnapped and interned with no reason given. I'm not trying to protect terrorists, I'm arguing for innocents who may have their life fucked because their government decides it is necessary....

posted 11-13- 04:54 PM               

One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter.
The British government probably
considered George Washington in the same light
as we do Bin Ladin. We've given the government
quite a bit of our freedoms in the past few
weeks. I hope they don't abuse it.

posted 11-13- 06:19 PM               

What do you think the British govt. would have
done to Washington if they had caught him?
Probably about the same as we're going to
do to Bin Ladin.

What is the definition of terrorism? This is
my whole point. It could be construed by over
zelous law enforcement officials and courts
to be almost anything. This is what scares me.

posted 11-13- 08:07 PM               

However, I don't think I would trust anyone
in govt., Demo or Repub to assign undefined
lables to people such as "terrorist" and then
treat them accordingly.

Here is a potential problem I see under these
new powers. Say a union goes on a long strike.
Tempers flare and some hot head union members
do damage to company property. The company
uses this as an excuse to claim they have
been the victims of terrorism. Sympathetic
politicians and law enforcement officials
agree with them and start detaining
union members indefinately and bugging the
telephones of union members and union officials.

Unless you've been involved in a long bitter
labor dispute don't tell me the above couldn't
happen. If it gets long enough and bitter enough
either side will do anything they can to make
themselves look like they are in the right.

This is a situation where govt. could
overstep their authority very easily. This is
why I say, what is a terrorist? It scares me
that appearantly it is whatever the govt. thinks
at a given time.

Now, why are you so trusting of big govt. all
of a sudden? These people have just gotten
the power to call you a terrorist and throw
you in jail indefinately. Is it because you
trust govt. as long as republicans are in power?

posted 11-13- 09:15 PM               

But, cradle to grave parenting by big government is not, IMO, a legitimate function because there are alternatives. The Federal Government should not do what State or Local Governments can do, and State or Local Governments shouldn't do what we can do ourselves. The power should gravitate down, not up, unless the lowest common denominator is incapable and must rely on some higher authority.

posted 11-13- 10:00 PM               

At least thats how the Home Orrofice Minister put it when asked on't TV t'uther day.

As for N.Ireland.....you just cannot relate it to todays situation. America would have to attack itself wouldnt it?.....i mean wasnt it the USA who funded, in part at least, the IRA.
The only reason the IRA finally decomissioned arms was cos America had to stop funding them as they would have been blatently contradicting itself.
Maybe be wrong on this. I apologise if ive offended anyone with this last statement its just i remember something being said about McDonalds donating a penny/cent in every pound /dollar made towards the IRA....maybe that was just a rumour........

posted 11-14- 10:05 AM               

You can't win an internal war without easing up a bit on are usual rights. It is true that the terrorist ruin it for everyone.

Internment means just what it means... it in itself does not imply torture. We had internment for the Japanese in WW2... Hitler had internment for the Jews... they don't have to be idendical to be considered a form of internment.

If terrorism gets worse and worse to the point where millions of Americans/English are dying each year... then I bet you might be for rounding up ALL Muslims for into internment camps for example... or getting them out of the country.

See... it is all apractical reality that must supercede peace-time ideals. Blanket statements about things like internment shows an ignorance to the harsh realities of real life...

But I think that most everyone enjoys the days when our ideals are able to go unchallenged and internment is always evil...

posted 11-14- 04:51 PM               

SV, you have so much flawed logic in such a short space of writing that I don't know where to begin. Is it not torture to be placed in a camp because of ones religion? And would America be a free country, with freedom of religion, if we rounded up "ALL Muslims?" And SV, is it not showing much more ignorance to the harsh realities of life, to make "Blanket statements" about a word which means something horrific to the Irish?
"It times of war we must use more drastic measures that might snag innocents as well."

posted 11-14- 10:48 PM               

Did you miss that part where I said MILLION of innocent Americans/English were dying each year.. or more????

Maybe you are just not good at hypotheticals... it can be confusing unless you read very careful and have an open mind to argue.

Let's say that a major american city is totaly destroyed each month by terrorist.. who turn out to all be muslims from a known pool of 10,000 people who came into this country over the last 10 years.

You have a choice... either countinue letting AMAZING genocide continue... and a terrible world to form... or round up all the suspects (suspects!!! not proven guilty!) and lock them in camps or ship them out of the country.

What do you chose?

I never implied that we are at the point of internment camps now... my argument is that there is a threshold that is crossed when you go there.. and beyond.

Where is my logic flawed? I say your logic is flawed. Your argument as you present it is that there is NEVER a point where you start rounding up the suspects and doing something about a totally out of control situation.

posted 11-14- 10:53 PM               

If you dont want the electric chair, don't kill the guy who stole your girl friend.

Not that these terrible situations don't suck some innocent people in... but I hate to break the news... some people ARE bad and deserver to be rounded up.

In a time of war it is IMPOSSIBLE to make a full case against each enemy!!!

Imagine you are on the WW2 battlefield... do you try each enemy that you have in your sites? This is sillyness.

Some people will not accept that we are at war... I think they watch too much TV and do think that anything is real...

Maybe I would think differnt if my family was going to an inernment camp? Well maybe YOU would feel different if your mom and dad were in the world trade centers.