Wimbledon is key target for Al Qaeda bombers

Didge wrote:

The Puzzler wrote:I would suggest that any 'British' jihadists that return should be locked up in solitary for life so that they cannot radicalise or attack anyone forever....but while we're part of the ECHR that's impossible. Leftie lawyers like Shami Chakrabati and Gareth Peirce would be screaming injustice from the rooftops...

So you see no point in deradicalisation or turning former terrorists to our side?

victorisnotamused wrote:NO...we are talking about one very specific crime...terrorism...

so you are using a straw man

you are just plain wrong the two are NOT the same thing, either in type or severity of potential threat... historically and now
we must have hundreds of active paedophiles running about (many of whom are, at this moment unknown) yet I dont see society "severely damaged" as a result of their actions nor do I see mass casualties of the nature, severity and number that a determined and skilled terrorist could inflict

You may claim to be "center right" but your inane scribblings belie you inner leftie...

Ok if theres a problem with sending em back to where they have been "jihading" then just shoot em dead on confirmation.....I mean..what else we gonna do with em? lock em up?...at what cost and increased security risk?

what part of we dont want em back here dont you get

when i say dont want em back...thats like ...no really, we can well do without having these people here its not dont want as in "I dont want an ice cream".....Its dont want as in "I dont want saoking in petrol and igniting"......Or I dont want a dose of ebola

our responsibility for them and to them ENDED when they decided to join this foul group....

The Puzzler wrote:

Didge wrote:


So you see no point in deradicalisation or turning former terrorists to our side?

I would rather see them put where they cannot do any harm.

Didge wrote:

victorisnotamused wrote:so you expect folks to ?????

well???

Who said I expect?

You did maybe, the point is, during the height of the IRA campaign, we never allowed them to achieve their aim of using terror, people did stand united, even though some Irish were also stereotyped, the point you miss I guess.
You stand united against terrorism, not divided

Didge wrote:

The Puzzler wrote:
I would rather see them put where they cannot do any harm.

How about all eggs in one basket?

The Puzzler wrote:

Didge wrote:



How about all eggs in one basket?

Me no comprende senor. What's that got to do with the price of fish? Jihadists, and hate preachers cannot do any harm if they are all locked in solitary confinement, they cannot spread their hate and influence other Muslims. Why shouldn't that be a viable solution?

Didge wrote:

victorisnotamused wrote:


you can no more deradicalise (what a stupid term) than you can cure a paedophile

Really, then why do we have former terrorists  work for our security services?


you can always turn a (very small) few with sufficient threats/bribes...does not mean they do so willingly or lose their former allegience.


Who heads up Quillian?


Quillian?...hmmm just looked at it.....sounds nice and fluffy on the surface.....will look a bit further into that....  

Are you saying he is still a terrorist?

What a crock of shit and proves your intent is to sow the seeds of discontent within a society, you play into the hands of the terrorists and give them exactly what they want and even worse you fail to even see that

Didge wrote:

The Puzzler wrote:
Me no comprende senor. What's that got to do with the price of fish? Jihadists, and hate preachers cannot do any harm if they are all locked in solitary confinement, they cannot spread their hate and influence other Muslims. Why shouldn't that be a viable solution?

You place them all in one jail, one for all terrorists.

The Puzzler wrote:

Didge wrote:


Who said I expect?

You did maybe, the point is, during the height of the IRA campaign, we never allowed them to achieve their aim of using terror, people did stand united, even though some Irish were also stereotyped, the point you miss I guess.
You stand united against terrorism, not divided

The IRA campaign was vastly different to islamic terror, they wanted independence from Britain for Northern Ireland, they didn't want to establish a fundamentalist Catholic state on the mainland. Both terrorist groups, but 2 vastly different animals.

The Puzzler wrote:

Didge wrote:



You place them all in one jail, one for all terrorists.

I could go along with that. As long as they were all in solitary and it was heavily, heavily guarded.

Didge wrote:

The Puzzler wrote:
I could go along with that. As long as they were all in solitary and it was heavily, heavily guarded.

No need to have solitary, and I would have them endure listening to Barry Manilow 24/7 over the loud speakers, with episodes of Little house on the Prairie daily

The Puzzler wrote:

Didge wrote:



No need to have solitary, and I would have them endure listening to Barry Manilow 24/7 over the loud speakers, with episodes of Little house on the Prairie daily

Why not?

Didge wrote:

The Puzzler wrote:
Why not?

Because I see no need to.
More to the point why should you?

The Puzzler wrote:

Didge wrote:

Because I see no need to.
More to the point why should you?

To punish them. It would certainly be vastly superior to the system we have at the moment where jihadists are all but running certain prisons, they even dictate the canteen menus.

Didge wrote:

The Puzzler wrote:
To punish them. It would certainly be vastly superior to the system we have at the moment where jihadists are all but running certain prisons, they even dictate the canteen menus.

I fail to see what that would achieve, where as my way, they have to endure as a group being taunted with such bad music and TV