Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7177702.stm


This story got me thinking.

Generally, I'm all for terrorists being locked up - no ifs or buts, but if you kill innocents intentionally, then you forfeit the right to freedom.

I'm not sure whether it is reassuring or frightening that we only seem to be catching complete idiots (eg. the Glasgow comic terrorists who didn't seem to know that gas cannisters in a landrover won't explode without an accelerant.. and this guy here who e-mails his plans!)

However, the question I have is related to the fact that from the article it appears the guy wanted to go overseas and fight troops who had invaded Afghanistan and/or Iraq.

The question that comes to mind is would we have locked him up if a few decades ago he had gone to join Bin-Laden in fighting the Russians in Afghanistan? Or how about going even further back if he had decided to go and join the French resistance during WWII or say fight the fascists in Spain (as some British men did).

Also, should we also be locking up the knucklehead white supremacist who has bomb manuals on his pc and goes for training in the forests of England? I wouldn't waste time on locking up these people... but that's just me.

Cheers,
Shafique

The Spanish fascists, Hitler or the Russians were not British allies. And this guy was for sure to kill British allies. There is a difference...
I am not from the UK and I am far away from being a UK law expert. But isnot there a law in the UK against Brits joining a foreign army as in most countries? If the guy holds UK citizenship, than yes in all the cases the law would be against him.

All of them ..... who's not authorized / recruited / approved by govts of respective countries to take up amrs and fight, displaying violence, Extremism, intention of committing violence against humanbeings... should be arrested.

Irish terrorists did target British citizens - bombs went off on the UK mainland and they also targeted British troops.

However, I don't recall Irish people being locked up for just intending to go and fight (but perhaps I'm wrong - were some the guys interned just sympathisers?)

And whilst the Irish terrorists were targeting civilians, politicians and military - Americans were happily donating money to them in public fund raisers.

The guy was convicted of a new offence (introduced in 2006) of 'preparing to commit a terrorist act overseas'.

Cheers,
Shafique

So, what is your answer to your original question?

Flying Dutchman wrote:So, what is your answer to your original question?

I think we would not have locked him up if he was going to join Bin Laden to fight the Russians in Afghanistan.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:

Flying Dutchman wrote:So, what is your answer to your original question?

I think we would not have locked him up if he was going to join Bin Laden to fight the Russians in Afghanistan.

Cheers,
Shafique

I dont know abt the Irish issue, but sure if it is not asked/allowed by the state it should be punished. If the Govt is supporting the civilians to take up guns and attack/commit violent crimes or support such heinous activities then the citizen wont be arrested. Like the Indian saying .. ' yadha raja tadha praja' to mean 'As the ruler, so the ruled'. But in the practical world with money and political muscle powerful countries write the history the way they want.. I so love utopia.

I think there is a big difference. This guy is making a statement saying that he went to Afghanistan to train on how to kill and fight British troops and subjects, not Russians.

As he is a British citizen - this is treason. I would be dam surprised if another country would not have arrested him had he been a citizen of that country talking of attacking that countries troops.

A no brainier really. I can understand an Iraqi insurgents cause in the same way as I can understand a prov IRA fighter - but when it comes to people who live and enjoy the benefits of the country they reside in, but want to in turn attack it, well the uk should throw all they can at them in my mind, in just the same way as any other country would, whether it be Spain, Saudi, Iran or Japan.

Yes, it would have been helpful to stop outsiders from going to join a foreign cause. I'm sure those foreign governments would have appreciated it. It didn't happen though and nothing can be done about that.

jabbajabba makes good points.

kanelli wrote:Yes, it would have been helpful to stop outsiders from going to join a foreign cause. I'm sure those foreign governments would have appreciated it. It didn't happen though and nothing can be done about that.

jabbajabba makes good points.

In the case of Afghanistan, the UK and US helped fund and train those fighting the Russians.

I have no problem with locking up people who are threatening the lives of British citizens - but I am concerned about the erosion of civil liberties. Ultimately, in my view, when we lower our standards we lose as a nation and hand a victory to the terrorists.

I still think from the reports this guy is a lone idiot.

"In court, his lawyer said that Qureshi was a Walter Mitty figure fantasising about becoming a hero - and that he exaggerated his importance to impress others."


Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:when we lower our standards we lose as a nation and hand a victory to the terrorists

I really couldn´t agree more
But I donot think arresting this dude is eroding civil liberties.

I think prosecuting him under a law that labelled his future intended actions as 'Terrorism' is eroding civil liberties.

I've argued that openly opposing an occupying military force does not constitute terrorism.

There are enough laws to prosecute and lock up people who intend to kill.

Cheers,
Shafique

Well, this falls under the category that one man´s terrorist is another´s freedom fighter. Your definition of a terrorist clearly differs from the definition used by the UK government.
And I donot consider killing people (or planning or intending to) anywhere in the world a civil liberty, whatever the cause.

I'm sure there are many other groups fighting for causes that are also being funded by larger governments. Hezbollah, Iran and Syria come to mind...

It is all hypocrisy - to fund and train and when it suits and then make laws that prevent others from doing it to you and your allies. It is all a big game.

Hypocricy? More self-interest and realpolitik.

kanelli wrote:I'm sure there are many other groups fighting for causes that are also being funded by larger governments. Hezbollah, Iran and Syria come to mind...

It is all hypocrisy - to fund and train and when it suits and then make laws that prevent others from doing it to you and your allies. It is all a big game.

I agree, we are all pawns to this intra-governmental feuds.......politics at its best....

sheesh reading the story gave me goosebumps that England has its own "terroists" to worry about. A bit shame in it that a dentist assistant and a WHS worker would go down this lane. A bit shame that skilled ppl working as doctors, dentist, programmers and even engineers would think of joining Al Qaeda because it shows they are not happy about American foreign policy. And the worst thing is no is there to listen to them and when they have no one to listen to them they will take things into their own hands.

I wonder how many ppl are there in England, USA and across Europe just like him. I am guessing in thousands. Imagine all of your doctors, programmers etc making their way into Afghanistan or into Iraq.