Minority Report

Arbiter & Cafeenman

You two just don't get it. The government (in the USA) has given it's self the right to just detain people without any reason and they can strip away their constitutional rights so that they have no recourse to legal representation and the right to defend themselves.

Step away from the current case and think about the wider implication for society at large.

I see you're now happy for the government to just tell you that someone is bad, lock them away and throw away the key. The trial is the fairest and most objective way to determine someone's guilt. The government are saying that they don't want their suspects to be be judged fairly, they want us to just take their word on it.

What is it exactly that makes America the country with the most freedoms when your government can just come along, arrest you, strip away your rights and detain you for as long as they like? If you were in that situation, wouldn't you like some means or some avenue to pursue in order to establish your innocence? Ofcourse it's ok when it's happening to him.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by simonm
Arbiter & Cafeenman[/b]

You two just don't get it.

---

I do get it simon, and I don't care. More to the point is I think what they're doing is ok.

Quote:

---

What is it exactly that makes America the country with the most freedoms when your government can just come along, arrest you, strip away your rights and detain you for as long as they like? If you were in that situation, wouldn't you like some means or some avenue to pursue in order to establish your innocence? Ofcourse it's ok when it's happening to him.

---

Because it's never going to happen to me, right. It's ok because they're use some measure of common sense and it's not going become a widespread abuse.

It could, but it won't. I don't worry about the "what ifs" that will never happen.

Quote:

---

Because it's never going to happen to me, right. It's ok because they're use some measure of common sense and it's not going become a widespread abuse.

---

I hope for your sake that you're right because there'll be diddley squat you or anybody else in America can do about it if they do abuse their power. You'll just have to roll over and take it, won't you?

How will you even know if it leads to abuses of power? You're just going to believe everything the government tells you, right?

Why not abolish trials and the bill of rights altogether? Government officials can just make the judgement themselves behind closed doors. You trust them to make the right decisions, don't you?

So what if a few innocent people get locked up, it'll stop any potential criminals getting off the hook, right?

Quote:

---

I do get it simon, and I don't care.

---

Remember that if any of your friends and family get locked up...

Bang on target Simon.
It's all right when no close friends or relatives are involved.
Which, incidentally, seems to be the major approach in America.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally Pipp
Bang on target Simon.
It's all right when no close friends or relatives are involved.
Which, incidentally, seems to be the major approach in America.

---

Wally, I don't know what your problem is with America and Americans... actually, I don't care about that either, but you sure never miss a chance to take a shot at us. Considering Belgium has done little or nothing of significance ever, I guess it's easy to sit back and take shots since you never take a risk that would put you in a position for someone to take shots back.

Still, both you and simon are addressing things that won't happen and it's not something you will have to deal with anyway unless you choose to move here.

The reason it won't affect my family or those I care about is because we exercise common sense in our daily lives and the government gives a damn about what we're doing.

If you really believe that the government is going to arbitrarily go around arresting people then you have very little grasp of reality. They have better things to do no matter what you think.

During time of war the government does what it needs to do. England did it WWII and we did too and now we're doing it again. When it actually happens to a common citizen who's minding his own business and isn't threatening anyone or buying plastic explosive, then I'll be concerned.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by simonm
Arbiter & Cafeenman

You two just don't get it.

If you were in that situation, wouldn't you like some means or some avenue to pursue in order to establish your innocence? Ofcourse it's ok when it's happening to him.

---

I do get it. I'm perfectly aware of the implications and as I've stated it's better for one "innocent" person to cop for it than for a few lunatics to be free.

As has been stated, it's only the people that draw attention to themselves that are going to feel the hand of the government on their collar. Is the government just going to grab some random guy and hurl him in prison? Not at all - he must do something to attract their attention. Or do you think they roll dice to find out who to arrest?

And let's face it, the justice system in the UK is complete bollocks. Recently, one guy who mugged a blind man (who then died of his injuries) got six years in jail. A blind man! Someone else defending his property shot someone and got life. As far as I'm concerned with a justice system like this, we might as well let the government arbitrarily decide as they're unlikely to come up with more ridiculous sentences that what we already get...

Thank you for your concern. Be sure to thank us every time you buy some pralines or play a saxophone. :rolleyes:

So because my nation is small and hasn't 'achieved' anything, I should shut up and refrain from providing my opinion just because the US is mucho bigger, better, stronger and bolder ?

I actually agree with 'surfer here : you can arrest on suspicion but if you arrest someone, you should charge him or release him.

And no, I don't think that the government is going around arresting people on sight. And I thank you for not insulting my intelligence.

I however don't think the world of the US. I've nothing against Americans themselves but I do have questions about American politics, especially foreign.

Are you saying I'm not allowed to ? Are you saying I should fold to the general "America is the greatest nation on earth" sentiment that seem to be obligatory in these times of "With or Against us"

But if it makes you feel any better, I don't really care about the subject. I'm only glad that in my country things and thoughts run different.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally Pipp
And I thank you for not insulting my intelligence.

---

And I will thank you if you can return the courtesy.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally Pipp


So because my nation is small and hasn't 'achieved' anything, I should shut up and refrain from providing my opinion just because the US is mucho bigger, better, stronger and bolder ?

---


Are you saying I'm not allowed to ? Are you saying I should fold to the general "America is the greatest nation on earth" sentiment that seem to be obligatory in these times of "With or Against us"

But if it makes you feel any better, I don't really care about the subject. I'm only glad that in my country things and thoughts run different.

---

Nope. Every opinion counts, and without all opinions a debate is a rather shallow thing indeed.

And you shouldn't fold to the "America is the greatest nation on earth" sentiment. I certainly don't. And if that means I'm against America then so be it.

But I do have an issue with all the cries of human rights and civil liberty, which only comes from people whos daughters haven't been raped and who's family hasn't been blown up. This recurring theme that we only say we want people locking up because it hasn't occurred to any of immediate friends.... well, it's works both ways. Maybe people would be less likely to cry human rights for criminals if it was their child who'd been crucified by some 'not right'.

And I'm glad Belgium's got it's government sorted. I'm sure it's not perfect, but you hear far less complaints about it than you do about England and Americas. :)

Agree with you there Ben. I always thought that the law is the law and everyone, regardless of background, should abide to it.

It also means that you are innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around. And innocent people have the same civil rights as you and I. If you're guilty, you should be trialled and punished according to law, receive the sentence and then maybe, after a year or 6 of close observation, you could rethink, shorten or suspend punishment. But first comes the sentence, after that the possible rethink. In order to find someone guilty, you need charges and proof for those charges.

If they are so sure about his intentions then they should charge him and bring on proof of their case. As simple as that.

Thats a fair point, and in an ideal world that's how it should be done.

But with a justice system that lets people off on bizarre technicalities it will never happen.

Of course, he's got a few pounds of plutonium, several kilos of conventional explosive and a diy guide to making a mess - but he wasn't going to use it. It's just his hobby y'know. And prevent his hobby is against his human rights.

Ok then, we'll release him and give him £200,000 for hurt feelings.

That's the system over here. Belgium might have it sorted but we've got a right load of prats in all levels of the justice system.

So, in theory, I agree - in this bonkers world however, my views are as previously stated.

Errr ... TBH, if someone were arrested with those items he would be charged with illegal possession (even if it was 'a hobby'). You're simply not allowed to possess explosives or nuclear material in this country without a permit.
The manual would be regarded as additional evidence. :)

It's not all perfect here but Wotsisname would have to be charged or released.

I think that's ciberthugs point. If he can be arrested on a real charge, Do it.

I'd just like to add a few comments here. As an Australian, i have some reasons not to like the Americans. From day to day they can be a bloody annoying group of people. They put trade tariffs in place to protect their bad, backward farmers, and other various industries. But that is not the point here, i just want to get across that i am not some sort of America lover.

What i want to say is that i agree with what the american government is doing. We have entered a new world, with a new type of war. This new type of war cannot be classified according to the old style - Nation states in formally declared war between two uniformed armies. This new war is between established nation states and shadow groups of no national affiliation, only religious/political agreements. These groups do not formally declare war on their enemies, they attack from the shadows and return when they are done.

The shadows here are our neighborhoods. To achieve their goals, these terrorists enter the country, hide, gather the tools for their attack and then do so.

The problem that the west faces - and this includes belgium - is that these people have definately gone down the path of warfare. They train in military camps, they form military organisations, they are practically soldiers. So they cannot be considered civilians. But they cannot be considered POWs when they are captured, because they do not belong to a uniformed, open army, and the last time i checked, the al queda did not sign the Geneva convention on the treatment of POWs. And to my recollection, both sides in a conflict must have signed this agreement for the POWs of both sides to be afforded the rights from this convention.

These terrorists fall into a different category - they are not military or civilian prisoners, they are people who have declared that they will try to kill us. So the american/australian/british government detains them before they can achieve their aims.

Anyway, before i go on at length and repeat the thoughts of cafeenman and those who think the same - i'll just add that i totally agree with them and the actions of the american government on this issue. After all, the american government can't even keep Bill Clintons blow job quiet for 1 year, how can you expect them to keep the aliens secret for over 50 years? All those conspiracy theories are a heap of *****.

I agree with cyberthug. If the government can haul anyone off, without telling the public its reason, where does it stop? it's certainly not illegal to carry $10000 around in your pocket. American citizens had rights last time I checked, and I would like to keep it that way.

It's good to have some support, Blinky. I really don't like the way our government does business with our "friends" sometimes, but I wish people could see through it and not take it out on all of us.

According to the Laws of Land Warfare, anyone who takes up arm against a country is considered an enemy combatant and can be treated as such. That's according to the Geneva Conventions. I can provide a link to the reference if anyone wants it, but I'd have to find it again or I'd just post it now.

Other than that, I've stated my opinion in every other post in this thread, so I won't go into again except to say it hasn't changed.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by snakeeyes1000
I agree with cyberthug. If the government can haul anyone off, without telling the public its reason, where does it stop? it's certainly not illegal to carry $10000 around in your pocket. American citizens had rights last time I checked, and I would like to keep it that way.

---

Maybe if people would read up on the case then they wouldn't post things like this and perpetuate bad information.

The government has stated why they hauled the guy off. The military has never had to press charges to hold enemy prisoners. Not a country in the world has to charge an enemy prisoner with a crime. They're an enemy and we have the right to hold them prisoner. THIS IS NOT A CIVIL CASE.

You're banging your head against a wall cafeenman.

Debate is dead, long live stubborn arguing... :rolleyes:

Cafeenman

Quote:

---

If you really believe that the government is going to arbitrarily go around arresting people then you have very little grasp of reality.

---

No, I don't believe they would go roudn arbitarilly arresting people, they would undoubtedly target those who they deemed some sort of a threat. And not just to the country; to the regime as well.

Quote:

---

The government has stated why they hauled the guy off.

---

And you just have to take the government's word for it. The person in question cannot appeal against this or get a fair trial.

If you insist in placing blind faith in your government's decision making processes, that is your concern but it goes against the principles of democracy and open government.

Don't you think there's something wrong when your country, the land of the free, has to defend it's self against those who threaten it by stripping away those freedoms?

When you strip away the wealth difference between your country and those like Iraq, what is it that seperates you?

Do you think that the Iraqi police force go around arresting it's citizens arbitarilly? No, they act with purpose and take what ever measure they think are necessary to defend the regime. If your country needs to become like Iraq in order to defend against it, what's the point?