• This is a stand-to for an incoming competition, one of our most expensive yet.
    Later this week we're going to be offering the opportunity to Win £270 Rab Neutrino Pro military down jacket
    Visit the thread at that link above and Watch it to be notified as soon as the competition goes live

UK Police call for return of internment

Should we use Internment again against terror suspects?

  • Yes bang em up!

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No strip them of citizenship and expel them to a failed state

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Only if an equal number of non muslims are locked up as well to be fair

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No lets try hugging them instead fighting terror with love!

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Lock them up and their families

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No it didn't work in NI

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Yes but under regular judicial review

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Why not? They are criminally insane after all

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
#1
One of Britain's most senior police officers has demanded a return to a form of internment, with the power to lock up terror suspects indefinitely without charge.

The proposal, put forward by the head of the Association of Police Chief Officers (Acpo) and supported by Scotland Yard, is highly controversial.

Internment was last used in Britain during the Gulf war against Iraqis suspected of links to Saddam Hussein's army. It has also been used against terrorist suspects in Northern Ireland and Germans during the Second World War.

Ken Jones, the president of Acpo, said the increasingly international element of the terror threat made evidence-gathering a longer and more difficult process. He argues that a system is required where suspects can be arrested earlier than those suspected of involvement in more traditional crime.

'We can't let the threat develop to the point we ordinarily would, because the potential for a suicide bomber to take hundreds of lives is too awesome to merely contemplate, and so we are into the evidence-gathering phase much earlier,' he said.

'Then we are into judicially supervised detention. The fact is that these cases do take much longer to investigate. The reach of an investigation can be global. We are using a system designed to protect the rights of a suspect of a routine criminal case in the United Kingdom and we are pushing it to its limit.

'We should never have got involved in the 90-day debate. In hindsight, we should have said that we needed an extraordinary mechanism to give us the ability to investigate these complex cases under judicial supervision,' said Jones.

Moves to extend the police's power to hold suspects will be dealt with in a security bill in the autumn.

Lord Carlile of Berriew said problems with the immigration service and Passport Agency left terrorists free to move in and out of Britain.

The Observer can also reveal that the criminal convictions of the leader of the 21/7 bomb plot, Muktar Said Ibrahim, were not disclosed to the immigration authorities when he applied to remain in the UK. In 1996 Ibrahim, originally from Eritrea, was given two prison sentences to run concurrently, one for three years, the other for two, for handling stolen goods, sexual assault and robbery. But the offences were not revealed to officials when they granted him leave to remain in April 2000 - despite the fact they were still running.
In full

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2126704,00.html
 
#3
Interment has never worked in the past - the political fallout always outways the benefit - NI, Guantanamo etc... I can see nothing in the Police proposal that will change this. In order to win this conflict we need to maintain the moral high ground, if we change the rule of law to deal with then then they will have scored a mojor victory against our way of life.

Why do we never learn from history?
 
#4
I can't think of anything more guaranteed to play into the hands of the Islamist extremist. Internment was the best recruiting tool that PIRA ever had; Guantanamo Bay has done a similar job for AQ. Do we really want Little Rissington or some other ex MOD Base to be another rallying point for these swine?

And it probably won't work, as has been shown by the Long Kesh and Gitmo. The int required for it to be effective would have to be phenomenally good, and the fact that a bunch of Doctors just set up several mini-BBQs at either end of the country suggests that despite the best efforts of MI5, SB etc, indicates that they don't have tabs on every player.

Are we really prepared for civil liberties to be curtailed to this extent? I am far from being a limp wristed lentil eater, but if I'm thinking twice about this from a human rights perspective, then your average Guardianista / Liberty supporter will consider internment in UK as tantamount to building another Auschwitz.

However I would support a return of the Death Penalty for Terrorists. Any PR storm would be worth weathering to ensure that this ultimate tool of justice was returned to the armoury of the State. And boy, would there be a PR storm.
 
#5
I think that the police could do with longer to complete their enquiries, but indefintly is rather a long time. What I would like to see that those who are here illegally and have been in trouble are shipped out of Britain and Europe as whole never to return. If they do return to any part of europe then they are locked for about ten years
 
#6
I personally would support the death penalty or life without possibility of parole for any support or direct act of terrorism against the crown or her servants.

Internment is a useful tool and could be used to it's full extent if required later, however for initial political purposes it might be best to dip a toe in the water with the above measures.

The comments from Lord Carlile are both accurate and give rise to the question as to why more has not been done to protect our borders. This must be one of the most important security issues so far, but has been placed on the backburner of things to do.

Really Op Banner is still alive and kicking, albeit in another place and another time.


fastmedic
 
#7
The one thing the UK does NOT need to do is throw petrol on the fires of Flaming Islam [and others]. Internment has an excellent track record of failure: it provides a focus for adverse publicity; it enhances recruitment; and is largely extra-judicial in the eyes of the World.

I have voted for expulsion [wherever it is possible, given the random distribution of UK passports]. Back in the 60s, Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew was faced with a crippling dock strike. He informed the Unions that this would cripple the economy and thereby damage the State .... it was therefore treason. Strikers would have their citizenship revoked and be "invited" to leave the country. There was no strike.

Expulsion and revocation of citizenship would seem to offer a way forward, although no doubt some legal minds on ARRSE will point out the pitfalls.
 
#8
W.Anchor said:
I think that the police could do with longer to complete their enquiries, but indefintly is rather a long time. What I would like to see that those who are here illegally and have been in trouble are shipped out of Britain and Europe as whole never to return. If they do return to any part of europe then they are locked for about ten years
Spot on. Our borders are porous. We need to establish a Border Force Now.

Take the much vaunted proposals to give Illegal Immigrants citizenship Off the table. Combined with rapid removal of undesirables Now, including the many foreign Imans who are poisoning young members of the Muslim community.

At that point, start dealing with the enemy within.
 
#10
blue_sophist said:
The one thing the UK does NOT need to do is throw petrol on the fires of Flaming Islam [and others]. Internment has an excellent track record of failure: it provides a focus for adverse publicity; it enhances recruitment; and is largely extra-judicial in the eyes of the World.

I have voted for expulsion [wherever it is possible, given the random distribution of UK passports]. Back in the 60s, Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew was faced with a crippling dock strike. He informed the Unions that this would cripple the economy and thereby damage the State .... it was therefore treason. Strikers would have their citizenship revoked and be "invited" to leave the country. There was no strike.

Expulsion and revocation of citizenship would seem to offer a way forward, although no doubt some legal minds on ARRSE will point out the pitfalls.
B_S,

The above might work if :

a) The individual was a legal citizen.

b) They were concerned that they wished to remain a citizen.

c) If they didn't have such rights of appeal and due time to spend taxpayers money whilst waiting for judgement.

d) The legal system was not so slow and biased towards the illegal immigrant/asylum seeker...etc.

We are a cuddly nation and now a soft target for anyone who has a grudge. Time for some harsh laws to be rushed through the merry men of the houses of commons and lords and protect what we have left before it's too late.


fastmedic
 
#11
I can see the attraction of this to certain elements within HMG. But, internment, or anything similar but dressed up slightly differently would fall foul of the European Human Rights Act. That's even if it made it through Parliament without being severly ammened by those MP's who would never countenance voting for such a measure.

Yes, we have used internment in times of war. In WWII thousands of German nationals were interned on the Isle of Mann, during what was a dire national emergency when the UK's continued existence as an independant state was at risk. But this is different. Many of those who would presumably be subject to internment are British Citizens. This is despite many of them being so in body, but not in spirit.

Even if it did get through Parliament without major amendment, there will still be the inevitible legal challenges. Organisations such as Amnesty International and Liberty (under the leadership of ARRSE favourite Shami Chakrabati) can and will take anything resembling internment all the way to Strasbourg and the European Court, who would almost certainly declare it illegal under human rights legislation.

As already mentioned there are the very obvious NI parrallels. I would not want to see a repeat of the bungled attmept to use internment against PIRA in 70-71 repeated in Leeds, Bradford, London et al. It has already been stated in this thread, but bears repeating as it is a valid point. Internment would only serve to radicalise elements of the Moslem population in the UK who to date lead normal lives, just like most of the remainder of the population and who support the rule of law and the bodies, such as the Police, who enforce it. The very real risk of the authorities getting it wrong, or for an arrest to spark serious rioting is a factor that cannot be ignored.

It is understandable that the Police, Security Service etcare considering this, but in the current climate I feel that it cannot work and would only serve to be counterproductive.
 
#12
Invicta said:
It is understandable that the Police, Security Service etcare considering this, but in the current climate I feel that it cannot work and would only serve to be counterproductive.
Only because I suspect they've become too bloody lazy and fat to actually do any work!
 
#13
Kitmarlowe said:
Invicta said:
It is understandable that the Police, Security Service etcare considering this, but in the current climate I feel that it cannot work and would only serve to be counterproductive.
Only because I suspect they've become too bloody lazy and fat to actually do any work!
I've worked with quite a few Police Officers over the years, both in NI and elsewhere. The vast majority are dedicated ot their jobs and are certainly not lazy. (Though there are a few fat ones)...
 
#16
Locking people up without charge or internment has been proven to be counter-productive. When main target of such a policy are likely to be a closely knit community, it would be even more of a recruiting tool for fanatics.

So why are ACPO proposing such a draconian response? IMHO, one of the main reasons is that the senior police officers concerned know it is what the politicians want and thay are all lining themselves up for promotion. Unfortunately whilst most police are decent and well intentioned individuals, their senior officers are invariably highly politically motivated and focussed on their own advancement, even to the detriment of their own staff and the general public. The rewards for ex-policemen with the right political connctions are immense.

If after 28 days you don't have enough evidence to charge someone then they should be released - it doesn't stop the investigation continueing. If you have evidence charge them and keep them locked up. Perhaps what we need is a change in the rules of collecting evidence: allow questioning after charge, allow phone tap evidence, protect witness identitity.

Human rights and personal freedom are a valuable commodity earned at great cost. Once they are supressed, you never get them back and everyone loses in the long run. The more you suppress, the more radicals and terrorist thrive.
 
#18
Bert_Preast said:
If the powers that be would allow intercepts as evidence there would be no need to lock them up without charge. That's all that's needed.
And then some daft judge would demand exactly how the evidence was procured. The security services would be forced to explain their methods and (believe it or not, not all terrorists are thick) bang goes that method of obtaining intelligence cos the baddies would stop doing it. Far better to use these methods to consolidate other means rather than use it as the sole criteria.
Internment? Great way of harbouring sympathy from the rest of the community.
Lock up all suspects? We haven't even got room for our home grown baddies let alone the suspected 4000 terrorists in Britain at the moment.
Death Penalty? Not one of the current political parties will ever support this because it's against EU rules and they are the ones that make the policy.
Deport them? It's been estimated it would take 40 years and 7 billion quid to do this. Just imagine the amount the human rights lawyers would make out of the dozens of allowable appeals. It would tie up the courts for the rest of their natural.
Shoot them? When it turns out to be a Brazilian tourist, the ess aitch one tee would hit the fan again.
Tighten up border controls? Yes, the best way to do it. And don't give out benefits until they've been legal in the country for at least 5 years. No NHS treatment, no dole, no social housing. Tell Jack Straw to apologise for neutering border controls when he was in the HO. Fine airlines for allowing people to travel with the wrong papers and letting women travel in their last 3 months of pregnancy. Wrong papers? Force the airlines to take them back. Cr@p on this, "I claim asylum" rule which allows them to stay to fight their case. Turn em straight around. Also, no allowing families to join those already in the country if they come from a stable place such as India or Malawi. We have almost a million illegal immigrants in this country already. Do not allow them to become legal as it will send out the message that we are an even softer touch than we already are, if that's possible.
 
#19
I think the jihadis know how telephone monitoring and email intercepts work already.

Spain gave the illegals an amnesty and since then the numbers attempting entry has risen sharply. They know if they can get in and keep their heads down for a year or so, when there are enough the government will give them papers.
 
#20
Longer to interview suspects?

Yes, if the CI or SSI or what ever high ranks the fuzz have say so, then a bit longer if a judge says so.

Internment with no time limit?

No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No.

Internment has worked when? We've been down this road before.

From BBC in 2002.

The UK Government introduced internment in Northern Ireland in 1971 against the advice of its military commander, newly-released secret documents show. The decision to detain republican terrorist suspects without trial caused fury and unrest in Catholic communities.

But Lieutenant General Sir Harry Tuzo, head of the Army in the province, had warned it would have a "harmful effect", according to the confidential cabinet papers.

Documents released under the 30-year rule also make it clear that the move, regarded as one of the biggest mistakes of the troubles, was made against the counsel of Whitehall advisers.
The results from 1972 were hardly a glowing recommendation for the reintroduction of this sort of thing.
 

Latest Threads

Top