• People who travel to war areas should be presumed terrorists until proven innocent, says Boris Johns
    28 replies, posted
[img]http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/77151000/jpg/_77151295_77151290.jpg[/img] [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28923689[/url] [quote]Britons who travel to "war areas" should be presumed potential terrorists unless they can prove otherwise, Mayor of London Boris Johnson has said. [url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/11054093/Do-nothing-and-we-invite-the-tide-of-terror-to-our-front-door.html]Writing in his Daily Telegraph column[/url], he called for tougher powers to deal with British extremists who leave the UK to fight in Iraq and Syria. He said there should be a "presumption" that Britons who go without telling UK authorities have a "terrorist purpose". Deputy PM Nick Clegg said changing the law would not help defeat extremists. And former attorney general Dominic Grieve said Mr Johnson's proposal undermined UK values. The Human Rights Act states that anyone charged with a criminal offence in the UK is "presumed innocent until proved guilty". But Mr Johnson wrote: "The law needs a swift and minor change so that there is a 'rebuttable presumption' (which shifts the burden of proof on to the defendant) that all those visiting war areas without notifying the authorities have done so for a terrorist purpose."[/quote] [url]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/11054093/Do-nothing-and-we-invite-the-tide-of-terror-to-our-front-door.html[/url] [quote]We also need to be far more effective in preventing British and other foreigners from getting out there (I am interested to see how many Belgians are there); and the Turks need to shut that border. We need to make it crystal clear that you will be arrested if you go out to Syria or Iraq without a good reason. At present the police are finding it very difficult to stop people from simply flying out via Germany, crossing the border, doing their ghastly jihadi tourism, and coming back. The police can and do interview the returnees, but it is hard to press charges without evidence. The law needs a swift and minor change so that there is a "rebuttable presumption" that all those visiting war areas without notifying the authorities have done so for a terrorist purpose. There are perhaps five or six hundred Britons currently out there - overwhelmingly, though not exclusively, young men. If and when there is a real attempt to take on Isil, they may come back in a hurry and in a group. Some of them will present more of a risk than others, but the evidence seems to be that most of the jokers - such as those portrayed in the satirical film Four Lions - have already come home. It is the harder nuts that are staying longer. When they come back, they will need surveillance at the very least, and we must look again at our system of monitoring these people. The Lib Dems will oppose the return of control orders; but even Nick Clegg would surely accept that times have changed. If we have to bring back control orders for some of the more serious risks, we should do so immediately. And unless they come back - and if they continue to give allegiance to a terrorist state - then absolutely we should take away their citizenship.[/quote]
so he's undermining one of the core principals of the justice system? HHHMMMMMMM
[QUOTE]But Mr Johnson wrote: "The law needs a swift and minor change so that there is a 'rebuttable presumption' (which shifts the burden of proof on to the defendant) that all those visiting war areas without notifying the authorities have done so for a terrorist purpose."[/QUOTE] He has a point though. Why else would you want to quietly slip into a war zone? Going to places like that for any reason is pretty extreme so telling the authorities what you're doing shouldn't really be an issue.
"I need to visit my sick mother in iraq" *bang*
[QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;45798594]"I need to visit my sick mother in iraq" *bang*[/QUOTE] That's a much more believable reason than "oh I just wanna meet the locals, you know :)", I don't see why they'd deny it
I think it should be a case by case basis, doesn't that make the most sense?
and people say this guy should be PM lmao [editline]25th August 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=HammerBrute;45797993]He has a point though. Why else would you want to quietly slip into a war zone? Going to places like that for any reason is pretty extreme so telling the authorities what you're doing shouldn't really be an issue.[/QUOTE] Freelance journalism? Family in the area?
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;45798913]and people say this guy should be PM lmao [editline]25th August 2014[/editline] Freelance journalism? Family in the area?[/QUOTE] Then they'll be proven innocent, as stupid as what he said sounds, it doesn't mean if you go to war zone areas you're going to get banged up. It means that you should be inspected and proven to be going there with a legitimate reason.
so mercenaries are terrorists now.?
[QUOTE=Silentfood;45798959]Then they'll be proven innocent, as stupid as what he said sounds, it doesn't mean if you go to war zone areas you're going to get banged up. It means that you should be inspected and proven to be going there with a legitimate reason.[/QUOTE] They should be questioned, but not assumed guilty until proven otherwise.
let's just be honest, though: the GCHQ and NSA are targeting these certain individuals because of that anyways, regardless of what the government "presumes" about them
I can see what he means because the threat of a terrorist attack by those who fought with IS and those coming back is very, very high.
I had a group of Iraqi businessmen come through my airport the other day, and while I've seen plenty of Iraqi families who were perfectly normal, these dudes in particular were awesome. They were joking with me and smiling and laughing. It was almost hard to believe they lived in Iraq if you only view the country through American news reports.
[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;45798975]so mercenaries are terrorists now.?[/QUOTE] Nowadays, terrorists is a name for people who fight against that person, kinda like how it was commies years ago.
[QUOTE=outlawpickle;45799431]I had a group of Iraqi businessmen come through my airport the other day, and while I've seen plenty of Iraqi families who were perfectly normal, these dudes in particular were awesome. They were joking with me and smiling and laughing. It was almost hard to believe they lived in Iraq if you only view the country through American news reports.[/QUOTE] There's an Iraqi guy who owns a restaurant near my place. He's a pretty cool guy, gave my family and I free baklava when we'd finished eating our (delicious) meal.
[QUOTE=Psychokitten;45799491]There's an Iraqi guy who owns a restaurant near my place. He's a pretty cool guy, gave my family and I free baklava when we'd finished eating our (delicious) meal.[/QUOTE] Had an Iraqi guy come into my shop, said that in Iraq years ago it was common for people to randomly buy people pizza or hookah just for the sake of it. Dude then bought me a damn pizza.
They should all be investigated given suspicion, surely. You have to remember that a lot of people did bail out and leave their home countries to go and help ISIS. Some have probably done enough to be considered accessories to genocide at this point.
[QUOTE=HammerBrute;45797993]He has a point though. Why else would you want to quietly slip into a war zone?[/QUOTE] Ahm, obviously to prove to yourself that you can? You and Boris are just too anti-weeaboo to get the japanese way of thinking.
YES! I was sick and tired of not living in a police state where everyone who owns a passport is a terrorist. Thank you Boris.
He's just trying to seem relevant by passing shite commentary, because he knows that nobody gives the faintest shit about his existence post-Olympics.
*Only brown non-christians.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;45798913]Freelance journalism? Family in the area?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Article]But Mr Johnson wrote: "The law needs a swift and minor change so that there is a 'rebuttable presumption' (which shifts the burden of proof on to the defendant) that all[B] those visiting war areas without notifying the authorities[/B] have done so for a terrorist purpose."[/QUOTE]
And why the hell does a citizen travelling abroad need to alert the authorities?
[QUOTE=Silentfood;45798959]Then they'll be proven innocent, as stupid as what he said sounds, it doesn't mean if you go to war zone areas you're going to get banged up. It means that you should be inspected and proven to be going there with a legitimate reason.[/QUOTE] but that's not the point of "Guilty until proven innocent" the point is you can shoot people and get away totally free "because he wasn't proven innocent" you can't prove a negative. How do they know you're there for family? what if you have no way to prove it? you should be assumed guilty when you're actually found guilty.
[QUOTE=Psychokitten;45802460]And why the hell does a citizen travelling abroad need to alert the authorities?[/QUOTE] Because why the hell would someone go to an active warzone without a good reason? If you have a good reason I'm sure they'll let you go.
The only real reasons you'd travel to a warzone is if you're a war tourist, journalist, visiting family or intend to take part (mercenary or otherwise). I think these people should be interviewed on why they're heading to such a dangerous place and anyone who rouses suspicion should be flagged and re-interviewed on returning to the country. This may also help the forces in said warzone to identify anyone who's captured or killed over there. This is a very difficult situation with a lot of grey areas.
Hello, and welcome to episode 229 of "Erosion of Basic Rights by Excuse of Terrorism".
[QUOTE=Xystus234;45800945]Had an Iraqi guy come into my shop, said that in Iraq years ago it was common for people to randomly buy people pizza or hookah just for the sake of it. Dude then bought me a damn pizza.[/QUOTE] Sounds like they put something else than tobacco in the hookah with those traditions. When i think about it, it makes alot more sense now why theres so many hookah bars in Copenhagen. Smoking hookah is boring as fuck so they need something to spice it up a little, and most of them don't drink.
[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;45798975]so mercenaries are terrorists now.?[/QUOTE] actually...yes!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.