Police fail even to question men held as a terror threat
Robin T Cox
threat
Suspected of plotting terror, a group of men have been held for four years
but never charged. Now, in their first testimonies, they reveal the
authorities have not even questioned them since their arrests
By Nigel Morris, Home Affairs Correspondent Published: 15 December 2005
Independent
Four men deprived of their liberty for four years on suspicion of being
international terrorists disclose today that they have not once been
questioned by police or security services since being arrested.
The four, who were among 16 suspects detained without trial under post-11
September terror legislation, later overturned by the law lords, give
harrowing accounts of the treatment they have suffered. All are now under
virtual house arrest. Although three face deportation, The Independent has
learnt that there is no prospect of the men ever being questioned over the
offences they are alleged to have committed.
More:
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article333258.ece
=======================================================================
One of the differences between democracy and dictatorship is that, in the
case of mistreatment it is clear that the dictator is to blame. Apparently
democracy is superior in that people can be mistreated and nobody is to
blame.
What a cause to fight for.
George
"Robin T Cox" <nom...@nomail.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.12.15....@nomail.net...
I take it that you prefer dictators.
George
argos
wrote:
>Enemies of the state? Police fail even to question men held as a terror
>threat
>
>Suspected of plotting terror, a group of men have been held for four years
>but never charged. Now, in their first testimonies, they reveal the
>authorities have not even questioned them since their arrests
>
>By Nigel Morris, Home Affairs Correspondent Published: 15 December 2005
>Independent
>
>Four men deprived of their liberty for four years on suspicion of being
>international terrorists disclose today that they have not once been
>questioned by police or security services since being arrested.
>
>The four, who were among 16 suspects detained without trial under post-11
>September terror legislation, later overturned by the law lords, give
>harrowing accounts
, that may or may not have occurred,
>of the treatment they
presumably
>have suffered. All are now under
>virtual house arrest. Although three face deportation, The Independent has
>learnt that there is no prospect of the men ever being questioned over the
>offences they are alleged to have committed.
>
>More:
>http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article333258.ece
>
>=======================================================================
>
>One of the differences between democracy and dictatorship is that, in the
>case of mistreatment it is clear that the dictator is to blame. Apparently
>democracy is superior in that people can be mistreated and nobody is to
>blame.
Or maybe the Independent is taking you all for a ride?
>What a cause to fight for.
Go for it. But you might want to get all the facts first? All I see
in this clearly biased "news" report are unsupported assertions.
argos
Robin T Cox
With dictators at least you know who the good guys and the bad guys are.
With our modern so-called 'democracies' you have no idea, as the ruling
clique usually find some way of covering up the truth.
BTW I am highly suspicious of the use of the term 'democracy', and I
recommend a sceptical view to you. In the days of the Cold War it was
highly fashionable for totalitarian states to call themselves democracies
(such as the GDR) when they clearly were not. If you think you are living
in a democracy, just be sure that the wool is not being pulled over your
eyes.
George
Umm, and dictators don't do this? Wasn't it Saddam Hussein who claimed to
have held a vote prior to the war, and claimed that he won the election by
100% of the vote?
> BTW I am highly suspicious of the use of the term 'democracy', and I
> recommend a sceptical view to you. In the days of the Cold War it was
> highly fashionable for totalitarian states to call themselves democracies
> (such as the GDR) when they clearly were not. If you think you are living
> in a democracy, just be sure that the wool is not being pulled over your
> eyes.
>
I have no illusions as to what kind of government the U.S. has. What about
you?
George
Robin T Cox
This article, and my comments, refer to the UK government. However, as I
am sure you know, the price of liberty is eternal vigilance; and even in
the case of the US it is important to defend democracy not only abroad but
also (perhaps more importantly) at home.
George
I couldn't agree more. Having said that, liberty and democracy are not
mutually inclusive. In other words, one can have liberty in many things and
still not have democracy. So I guess what I'm saying that one has to
define the terms of what liberty is applied to - personal, political,
religious, etc. So when is Britain going to write itself a constitution?
George
George
Robin T Cox
You could say that we've got one already, but that the various writings
are not all neatly bundled in one volume.
BTW on the theme of eternal vigilance, I wonder what you make of this
report from the Washington Post:
Bush Authorized Domestic Spying
Post-9/11 Order Bypassed Special Court
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 16, 2005; A01
President Bush signed a secret order in 2002 authorizing the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on U.S. citizens and foreign nationals in the United States, despite previous legal prohibitions against such domestic spying, sources with knowledge of the program said last night.
The super-secretive NSA, which has generally been barred from domestic
spying except in narrow circumstances involving foreign nationals, has
monitored the e-mail, telephone calls and other communications of
hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of people under the program, the New York
Times disclosed last night.
More:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/16/AR2005121600021_pf.html
George
The NSA has likely been doing this covertly for many years. Bush just made
it legal. I spend about 5 minutes/day on the phone, and nothing I post
here could be considered to be "subversive", whatever that means. Hell, I
even drive the speed limit, which I'm sure has pissed off more than one
person driving behind me. Am I worried? I have nothing to hide. If they
can catch a sleeper cell and prevent them from doing us harm, or else use
these powers for legitimate law enforcement purposes, I have no problem
with it. If they use it to steal secrets from corporations and individuals
for personal gain, or to harm their political enemies, I have huge problems
with it. The question is who are they spying on and why?
George