Pajamas Media

42 Comments

1. Sean:

Despite the 42-day rule, security cameras on every street, and a state-run media the brits have the audacity to lecture actual democracies on human rights and freedom.

Now’s the time for the brits to back their words.

Oct 27, 2008 - 2:03 am 2. Eric R.:

This piece is part and parcel with another recent PJM piece about the BBC going soft on Muslims.

British society, like the BBC (and to a great extent — BECAUSE of the BBC), is too paralyzed by political correctness, too fearful of the wrath of Islamic terrorism, and too infected with venomous, murderous anti-Semitism (which they have in common with the terrorists) to do ANYTHING to stop the Islamists – even hold them in detention for two additional weeks.

Oct 27, 2008 - 4:00 am 3. Jack247:

Mr. Gilligan must believe that those funds not put toward defending the UK are better used in the social welfare ministry. With those funds, they can give more to those with multiple wives and their extended families. That is only right… in dhimmitude.

Oct 27, 2008 - 4:50 am 4. Roy:

I agree wih the first poster, the 42 day rule is not something that should exist in a free society. It is an abomination. Might as well have Sharia as this, at least that will do something about the crime rate.

This is the sort of habitual authoritarianism that makes me question the sanity of any anglophile.

Oct 27, 2008 - 5:24 am 5. M.P.:

Mr. Gilligan can hold whatever opinion he pleases. Unfortunately, he and the other useful idiots who believe the same will not likely suffer the consequences of their views. They are the first cowardly sods to leave the country when their policies go wrong and take ‘teaching posts’ in safer places leaving the regular folk, for whom they pretend to advocate, to suffer and fight and they are the first to demonize those who make their freedom of expression possible.

Oct 27, 2008 - 5:48 am 6. dan:

And thus the curious relationship between Gramscian Communism and Islamism continues… I wonder what cements them? Venality? The thrill of orthodoxy? Or maybe it’s just a typical tactical arrangement, to be terminated in intramural slaughter over the corpse of the common foe? This all makes me realize that the sophomore year philosophy teacher I had, a Persian who’d taken part in the Islamic Revolution and assigned us all Gramsci and constantly referred to “my uncle, Karl Marx,” was some kind of plant. Too bad – another powerful intellect poisoned. I think Wretchard said several years ago that all this was an interest of his – where’s he been lately, anyway?

Oct 27, 2008 - 6:03 am 7. Sheila Raviv:

How right you are! The problem in the UK is the desire to show the world how democratic we are – whereas the truth is that democracy can only be maintained when criminals can be contained. Brava Ms Gould, Brava

Oct 27, 2008 - 6:07 am 8. Curbster:

42 day rule,…Sharia law,… hmmmm, lets see, we can hold you for 42 days or stone your wife in public while the crowds cheer as an alternative to divorce.

yaaa, pretty close to the same thing,…

btw did you say Obomination?

Oct 27, 2008 - 6:28 am 9. Laura:

Political correctness, “Nanny State” Socialism, open immigration, corrupt politicians, guilty white liberal appeasement, cowardice and the once again open anti-semitism have all taken it’s toll on post-WWII Europe. The only way Europe can overcome their eventual dhimmitude is for the people, and the politicians, to wake from their slumber and revolt against this Islamic tyranny. It’s been 1,000 years since the last Crusades. Europe is headed for the dark ages once again if they do not act now.

Oct 27, 2008 - 6:51 am 10. Mary Jackson:

Actually, most Britons don’t want identity cards. I certainly don’t – they will do nothing to stop terrorism. It isn’t the indentity of Muslims that is unknown; it is their intentions.

Regarding the anti-terror legislation being invoked to freeze British funds in Icelandic banks, this was an outrageous use of a law for which it wasn’t intended. Iceland isn’t our enemy and was negotiating anyway.

Regarding 42 days detention, we are right to be concerned about it. There is a small matter of habeus corpus – remember that?

Finally, I wonder why, if Ms Gould finds the UK so objectionable, she continues to live here.

Oct 27, 2008 - 7:04 am 11. cedarford:

Like it or not, security cameras have proven to be both huge crime preventers and crime solvers.

Law-abiding People in high-crime like them. They make people safer, drive off the muggers, whores, and drug dealers.

Prosecutors say there is nothing sweeter than confronting a mugger, gunman – and their lawyer with a security camera tape. The lawyer sorta implodes as they instantly know their client is screwed.
In a FL child kidnapping, rape, and murder – the man accused was belligerant and stridently denying he did it and that he had the money to get off. But a security camera caught the abduction. One minute into watching it, both the molester and his lawyer were sobbing – knowing it was all over but for the formality of the jury verdict and the lethal injection.

**************

Roy – the 42 day rule is not something that should exist in a free society. It is an abomination

No, the abomination is unlawful enemy combatants using military-trained teams operating in civilian clothing outside all rules of war. Terrorist Rights lovers, such as yourself, Roy, consider them “innocent until proven guilty” criminals, who should have full legal rights and only be dealt with in civilian courts.

The funny thing is that if you ask any terrorist what they are and what their actions are – be they Muslim. IRA, Tamil Tiger – they will unanimously tell you they are not criminals, but soldiers. And yes, they know as irregular military that they violate rules of war – and demand treatment and respect as captured soldiers without moral taint. (Even if it is to a Chinese firing squad or a military tribunal in Columbia.)
Constrast that with just about any criminal. They will say – beyond a fair chunk maintaining their innocence – that yes, murder, rape, robbery, beatin’ the shit out of the ‘ho, check fraud – they are all crimes.

The lovers of terrorist rights insist that unlawful enemy combatants are – what they are really not in their own minds. Criminals. In the few trials that have gone on not blocked by court meddling – the enemy combatants have made their considering their acts not criminal, but moral, crystal clear.

We blindly follow the de-legitimization tactics of the Israelis and Brits…in treating insurgents as criminals…which in the case of the IRA and Palestinians appears to only have motivated them further and made the conflicts persist longer as terror soldiers learned to swallow their anger and use the publicity from the enemy’s civilian courts and the openess of civilian prisons to propagandize against the enemy state.

It was stupid of the Jews and Brits to follow that track, and stupider still our own enemy rights lovers are dumbly trudging down the same ruts – insisting on habeas, lawyers, and full media access to the proclaimations of captured and imprisoned/being tried enemy combatants.

In WWII, we had 700,000 Nazis and Japs in our custody. Not just soldiers, but civilians we captured. None got a free lawyer team off the taxpayer. Not one went to US court except those we wished to kill after a military tribunal getting the right for a cert writ at the Supreme court.

Contrast that with taxpayers paying 32 million dollars and tying up a dozen FBI agents that should have been working counterterrorism to “work” on the Zacharias Moussaoui criminal conviction.

Oct 27, 2008 - 7:29 am 12. Mark Collins:

This is a government which has no problems abusing laws. As well as the previously mentioned case of using anti-terrorism legislation to seize the assets of a NATO ally, it has also allowed local councils to use laws designed to combat organised crime to spy on people to make sure they’re recycling and other such draconian abuses.

The current UK government doesn’t give a damn about Islamic extremism. When the mo-toon crisis started, the police just sat by while people with known connections to terrorism advocated the bombing in Denmark, in violation of god-knows how many incitement laws, in in the name of cultural sensitivity.

The reason the people here in the UK don’t want 42 day detention is simply – we don’t trust parliament not to abuse it when it suits them.

Oct 27, 2008 - 7:42 am 13. DoktorNo:

@Eric R.:

i agree. And this is why Britons are trying to substitute sound anti-terror policy with gizmos, like hand-held CCTV cameras for cops (there were a proposition like this, but propably it was considered too stupid, and declined).

Because buying extra hardware is easier, than making difficult decisions.

Oct 27, 2008 - 9:19 am 14. deguello:

Sorry to disagree with the writer; but none of these measures were/ are designed to protect UK from radical Islam(whatever that is) their chief intent is to protect the terminally corrupt)businee and political elites,from justified retribution from the people they have just finished robbing blind.THEY and the Economic depression they engineered,are bigger threats to freedom than 100 Osaman bin Ladens! When the Obamanistas take over,watch them use all the Bush anti terror provisions to shut down dissent. Besides,Europe is no longer free;PC Stalinism makes it difficult to say and write anything the elites don’t like.

Oct 27, 2008 - 10:17 am 15. deguello:

Incidentally it’s not marbles that England,and the other euroweenies have lost over the last 40myears! It’s a pair of low slung spherical objects,peculiar to the male sex,oh excuse me gender(it’s more pc).I don’t want to be prosecuted for sexism by an eurocourt!

Oct 27, 2008 - 10:24 am 16. Andrea in NY:

The English have gone wobbly. I have hope that they will regain their senses.

Oct 27, 2008 - 10:44 am 17. J.J. Sefton:

Forget it. Britain is lost. Westminster will become a mosque in 20 years, 30 at the outside. Goodbye, Avalon……

Oct 27, 2008 - 10:57 am 18. ReConUSMC:

When any Nation based on Freedom and Democracy gives into Racial Moslem blinded to other Religions and a that single minded dark Couture….. that don’t believe in Freedom or Democracy to start with for others
and only believes in their own
Personal Rights to advance their Religions and old counties dark ages …… All Nations are Destoyes that went alone with that insanity .
England will look Sudan and Syria .. Sooner rather than later sadly .
He who allows the known enemy in his home can expect the Knife to his back cleverly hidden after diner is served .

Oct 27, 2008 - 11:53 am 19. dgforbes:

Miss Gould might have mentioned the possibility that the British are weary after 11 years of the most intrusive, abusive, mendacious and incompetent government ever (despite much historical domestic competition) and are disinclined to allow it yet more powers to misuse and to harass them. I don’t suppose most British people are softer on terrorism than anyone else but they know a) that the British state is ferocious in the defence of its legal prerogatives and b) lies as it breathes. There is every reason to distrust the honesty of the political elites, the judiciary, the police or the media who have been complicit every inch of the way with New Labour’s institutional duplicity. The British state, once it acquires a power, never willingly gives it up which is an overwhelmingly good reason to be very careful about giving it any more.

Oct 27, 2008 - 12:39 pm 20. LJB:

When you have a government like ours you learn pretty quickly not to trust it. For example this goverment used anti terror laws to freeze assets of an Icelandic bank, they are not a terrorist country. Local government has used anti terror laws to snoop on peoples rubbish bins. We have more CCTV cameras than any other country but they dont seem to be stopping terrorists, thats down to our security forces. If we said yes to 42 days detention how long would it take for somebody to be held for 42 days just so they can prove beyond any doubt he or she was driving while using a mobile phone. That may read as rubbish to anybody who doesn’t live in the UK, but we have to live with the abuse of power and see it on a weekly basis. Was it not reported in the media a couple of years ago that police used a helicopter to prove a woman had been eating an apple while driving.

Oct 27, 2008 - 12:59 pm 21. DEGUELLO:

Bravo on those two last comments! Also, the young man in Oxford who was fined when he joked to a policeman thata neraby horse seemed ‘”gay”.Besides, a govt. that insists on open boredrs immigration,can’t be trusted when it demands repressive measures presumably aimed at the very group whose immigration it welcomes.CCTV cameras are an outrage in the nation of Georgr Orwell;they should be ripped down en masse1

Oct 27, 2008 - 1:18 pm 22. DEGUELLO:

Recon UsmC.Britain, like our nation ,was not based on freedom or democracy;it was based,like all nations, on murder,class warfare,pillage and war.If youy doubt it,check what the political eklites have done to theUS economy.

Oct 27, 2008 - 1:22 pm 23. Dave Surls:

“Now, journalist Andrew Gilligan, a household name in Britain…”

From this day forth I shall call Britain, Gilligan’s Island.

Oct 27, 2008 - 2:40 pm 24. Sam Duncan:

Good to see so much opposition to six-week detention without charge here.

Gilligan’s a jerk, but that’s no reason to automatically trust a power-crazed government that has used its “anti-terrorist” laws to suppress dissent at its own conference, freeze the assets of a foreign bank, and spy on people taking their trash out.

You don’t have to deny the Islamist threat to accept that illiberal (in its original sense) politicians see it as a “useful crisis”: an opportunity to pass all kinds of intrusive and controlling legislation that would be rejected out of hand at any other time. Remember who’s in power over here: the Labour Party. Socialists. “Proud” ones, at that. Don’t let your sceptical guard down just because they claim to be hard on Islamism.

Oct 27, 2008 - 3:39 pm 25. Will Becker:

Right on Eric,the Brits have a bunch of chickens in their government.So do we. A proud American

Oct 27, 2008 - 3:44 pm 26. seguin:

42 day detention?

I’d be concerned about it too…

Heck, the poor Brits have had a heavy-handed intrusive government for a long time, and then this sounds like its going to add to the misery. The problem here isn’t that the British government doesn’t have enough tools (legislative or otherwise) to fight fundamentalist Islam, it simply doesn’t have the will or desire. This is the wrong medicine for the disease.

You can’t sell liberty up the river to fight a totalitarian, authoritarian enemy. You end up conquered by totalitarianism anyway, just a native form.

Oct 27, 2008 - 5:10 pm 27. cedarford:

Seguin – You can’t sell liberty up the river to fight a totalitarian, authoritarian enemy. You end up conquered by totalitarianism anyway, just a native form.

I weep for the dark night of fascism that fell on America after Abraham Lincoln and his depravation of the lives and liberty and habeas rights of Copperheads and Southern white civil liberties lovers.

Just as I moan how Britain lost it’s liberties ineradicably – because it detained 400,000 Nazi soldiers and civilians greater than 42 days without civilian trials or lawyers. In fact, Britain fought WWII with a critical shortage of lawyers free to work hard at ensuring enemy rights. Many of the lawyers were actually subjected to peer pressure to become pilots to down enemy bombers – rather than work hard to assure downed Nazi warplane crew’s civil rights. Many other lawyers were in the “Barristers to Burma” Programme – where instead of counseling “innocent until proven guilty” Japanese on matters of law.

The tragedy is obvious. Instead of becoming a good German-speaking country obsessed with enemy rights – we have today’s Britain. A jack booted fascist state bent on violating the precious liberties of Paddy bombers, Muslim air hijackers, and out to end protecting the freedom of the UK’s most precious asset – its native born Jihadis – to continue to be free to advocate the killing of Danes, Jews, and British infidels.

Shame! Shame on the failure of Lincoln and the UK Parliament of 1939-45 to allow civilian courts to protect the enemy, and their sacred rights…

Oct 27, 2008 - 6:40 pm 28. David H:

I must say that I am in two minds, you see there was a law that was created to confiscate the wealth of gangsters and drugs dealers, which was then used against fishermen who had caught more than their EU quota of fish. Their assets were confiscated just like that, now in the context of that, I am not very happy with the current British government having any legal instrument like that and welcomed them being defeated. What annoys me more is the human rights leglislation that prevents us from deporting known terrorists, because of their human rights, sod their potential victims, i.e. us, the government of the UK, or should I say the governments of Europe have failed in their collective trust to defend thei citizens, they have forced on us a group of people who are out to take us over, kill us etc.

But anyway as I no longer trust any of the governments in Europe in terms of freedom of expression and democracy etc., then things like this need to be fought against because we can no longer trust that such laws will be used against those that they are intended for. The situation in Europe has gone past the Islamic terrorist stage to a autocratic big government that uses any means at its disposal to silence opposition.

If I trusted my government then I would accept it, I do not.

Oct 28, 2008 - 6:18 am 29. 49erDweet:

We are, after all, speaking of the Brits. What else could we expect? Brilliant in oration, clueless in comprehension, time and again saved only because their western cousins keep pulling their fat out of fires they themselves ignited because of their arrogance and ignorance.

Collectively, it seems they would rather be loved and “admired” than free. More to be pitied than censured, says I. Move on, nothing to see here.

Oct 28, 2008 - 9:43 am 30. LJB:

Well 49erDweet, if you have nothing sensible to say, don’t say anything. Going by your comment us Brits like to talk about things we haven’t a clue about and then we get saved by our American cousins.

In some cases I would agree about talking the talk, we have a government that likes to do that but doesn’t like to walk the walk, look at the state of our armed forces for proof of that, Lions lead by donkeys. Who to blame? Our wonderful government whose answer to everything is “It’s not our fault” The point here is don’t blame the Brits blame our soft government, the same government that Dubya can’t see past.

Can you explain to me what difference 42 days detention would make to anything? If a person is arrested on terrorism charges then the police must have already had enough evidence to charge them, so why do they need more time? As has been pointed out before the UK has a history of “Abuse of Power” how would you like your trash bins to be searched to make sure you’re not throwing plastic in the general rubbish bin, sound silly? These are the kind of things the ordinary British citizen has to put up with, and what law allows the authorities to do that? “The Anti Terrorism Law” as I said abuse of power.

We need our western cousins to pull our fat out of the fire, what are you talking about?

Oct 28, 2008 - 2:54 pm 31. David H:

deguello has my respect for getting it spot on in comment 14., and on other posts.

As for 49erDweet, no comment

Oct 28, 2008 - 3:05 pm 32. Another American in Britain:

Many apparent British commenters put matters very well. Also, having lived here for years myself, and then working in London on 7/7 when we had our nearby tube line blown up, I noticed that – surprisingly – most British don’t want to get murdered on trains or buses any more than does anyone else. Imagine that?

Although here in the UK quite a while longer, Ms Gould has seemingly developed something of a chip on her shoulder. She’d best get it under control. For in this piece she does a disservice to Americans back in the States through delving into these complex issues in the manner of some hyper-opinionated grad student who’d been here only a couple of months.

Andrew Gilligan is merely yet another mouthy columnist who “overcooks” in the quest to try to sell his newspaper. That’s also how he got into big trouble at the BBC in the first place. And there are lots of other columnists out there also with other “groundbreaking” opinions, but that doesn’t mean the Queen signs them into law.

Tearing apart Mr Gilligan for his intellectual weaknesses is reasonable enough. But portraying him to mostly American readers as somehow representative of “the British mind” is similarly “overcooked” to the point of absurd. The Evening Standard is not even a national; it is a very London paper, often bought in a hurry (as I used to) to skim on the train on the way home, and often left behind as you run off. It isn’t the 11th edition of Encyclopedia Britannica.

Presumably Ms Gould is aware of how in many ways the British here know terror better than we do? Anti-terror methods are not “new” to them. They coped for decades (sometimes well, sometimes not) with murderous IRA bombs (sometimes indirectly made possible by “contributions” forwarded by “concerned” Americans in Boston, New York and elsewhere) regularly going off in their city centers, train stations and rubbish bins.

Thus this country didn’t first discover terror with 7/7. So, in battling this most recent menace, much as in the U.S., all the public wants is balance and not to have their country become one vast surveillance land, leading eventually to “anti-terror” laws even being misused by local council officials to spy for weeks on families to determine if they actually reside in a desirable local school catchment area. (Which happened recently in Poole.) That means some tough policy choices have to be made, and so debate over this or that measure is always ongoing. (Btw, are warrantless tappings of phones and reading email, and detention without charge for nearly a month and a half, allowed now inside of the U.S. proper?)

Of wider concern, the view of America. Yes, many of America’s War on Terror policies are rather unpopular here, and there are many reasons for that. A major one is the perception (rightly or wrongly) that Britain is not being treated as an “equal” (there are now over 7,000 British troops fighting and, increasingly, dying in Afghanistan), but is instead taken for granted by Washington.

And quite a few Americans, lest we forget, aren’t exactly fans of those policies either. Also some (a few, if we are honest) British do feel that the U.S. is an “evil empire.” Yet why should that attitude here be a big surprise either? After all, again, lots of Americans INSIDE of America also think of our America as an “evil empire.” Those include, it would seem, not only many who will be voting for the Democratic nominee for President, but also, at least up until recently, even his wife, who has admitted as we know only to just coming around to a degree of pride in her country.

Unfortunately, reading Ms Gould’s piece, many British are going to get defensive at yet another bloody American trying to tell them how to run their country. In turn Americans already possessing contempt for Brits are going to deem her an expert and revel in British “failings.” An excellent literary achievement towards bringing us closer together to fight terror.

Oct 28, 2008 - 3:29 pm 33. LJB:

Our wonderful government has just admitted that they want to read all emails and text messages sent by citizens of the UK.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article4969312.ece

Imagine the scenario

I text my mate Bob

Me, Bob are you coming out for a pint tonight?

Bob, Yes, is Mohamed coming?

Me, No, he’s away buying fertiliser, won’t be back till tomorrow.

Bob, OK see you tonight.

10 minutes later……woo woo woo flashing red and blue lights. Me and Bob arrested on terrorism charges Mohamed is arrested on the M6 and were all held for 42 days. The newspapers are full of stories about how the police foiled a terrorist plan to detonate a fertiliser bomb and publish photos of us and our homes.

Reality of the above scenario. Mohamed grows vegetables in his garden.

Still think 42 days is the way to go?

Oct 28, 2008 - 4:15 pm 34. thegr8_1:

We in the U S are 10-20 years behind the U K, less if we elect the wrong President. 4 years of REPO (Reed Pelosi Obama) will destroy the US, cause defeat in Iraq, cause Israel to judge whether to attack Iran sooner etc. McCain street smarts in foreign policy, if the free world is secure, the recession we are in will work it’s way through our economies.

Oct 28, 2008 - 7:20 pm 35. RJM:

As a matter of interest, how long does the US allow people to be detained without trial or any due process?
Am I right in thinking the answer is 48 hours?

The 42-day proposal is to detain, without trial or access to lawyers.

That is an obscenity, an offence to democracy, something that would not be tolerated in the US.

So why does the lady columnist argue that it should be passed, in a faraway country of which she obviously knows little?

The existing law is for 28 days and that’s bad enough – something decent Brits are ashamed of. It’s the longest period of incarceration and isolation in the West.

42 days would have taken the country another step down the road towards police state. Oh, and please don’t say or attempt to argue that it would only be used against ‘proven terrorists’; by definition, it’s intended to give the police time to ‘gather evidence’ – that’s right, arrest them, lock them up and then try to find something against them. Most of those arrested or detained under existing legislation are set free, without any charge whatsoever – but have the suspicion of terrorism hanging over them indefinitely.

The UK government used the Crime, Security and Prevention of Terrorism Act to freeze Icelandic assets when their banks went down the tubes. There is an ongoing inquest (cause of death hearing) into the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes, an innocent electrician who was ‘mistaken for a terrorist suspect’ and shot seven times in the head on a rush-hour subway train.

Do not lecture the Brits on detention without trial – they may take notice, as they did with such huge success (NOT) in Northern Ireland.

Oct 29, 2008 - 5:26 pm 36. Chester White:

The UK is done for.

It may take a few years, but the bad guys will never stop and Brits will never summon the stones to resist.

Oct 29, 2008 - 7:37 pm 37. RJM:

No. 36

That would be your conclusion based on…? What, exactly?

Northern Ireland, perhaps? Where the Brits fought a low-intensity urban guerilla war against two well-organized factions for over 30 years, eventually bringing a peace to the benighted place?

the operation was fought against the background of major funding – millions of $ – being raised in the UK’s main ally and directed to the planning, construction and implementation of bombing campaigns, including against city centers on the mainland; against pubs and bars packed full of innocent people, as well as directly against the regular military. It achieved peace without resorting to raizing whole districts to the ground and abandoned detention without trial and arbitrary arrest as counter-productive.

And did so in the face of opposition from its main ally, the US.

And as for the current economic crisis – it is the UK’s Prime Minister who came out with the plans that pretty much the whole developed world is now following to get through it.

Not that this is an argument for supporting 42-day detention without charge. In the US, the maximum period of detention is 48 hours, is it not (correct me if I’m mistaken). 28 days is too long; 42 days would be abandonment of individual rights.

No stones? Get informed, get real, get a life.

Oct 30, 2008 - 3:28 am 38. Carol Gould:

No 32:
I think you misinterpreted my article. I am trying to illustrate the brilliance of the British intelligence services and police at thwarting some colossal and horrific terror plots. The courage of young Mr Smeaton and others at Glasgow on 30 June 2007 harked back to the bravery of Blitz Britain. In turn it is outrageous for Gilligan to suggest that we in Britain be put at risk because of the bank failures. I have been a British taxpayer and ratepayer, and sometimes even VAT-payer for thirty-two years as a permanent resident of London, and think it reasonable to put pen to paper and ‘tell them how to run their country,’ inasmuach as I am, after all, one of ‘them’ having to survive in this country.

Oct 30, 2008 - 5:17 pm 39. Anonymous:

42 days inprisonment without trial or charge is wholly unneccesary, no other western country deems it appropriate to trample on freedoms in such a way so why the UK?

The government says that we are more of a target than other western countries, if that is the case, maybe we should be asking why.

Oct 30, 2008 - 11:56 pm 40. David H:

Excuse me, as a Brit living in France I can tell you that in Europe you can be banged up in jail for years while they work on the case. And you as a Brit are subject to that if you carry out a criminal act that will get you arrested in one of the other European countries due to EU law. Why are people so ignorant about just how illiberal Europe as a whole is?

Its simple, in the UK before the EU you used to be free and the state created laws to constrain behaviour, in France and the rest you are given by the state certain freedoms by law, big difference and not many people seem to work that out!!!

Oct 31, 2008 - 8:02 am 41. jonesy55:

So why are you living in France then if it’s so terrible and you run the risk of being sent to a gulag at any time?

The answer would seem to be either:

a) You are an extremely foolish person

or

b) What you say is a complete exaggeration/misrepresentation of the real situation.

You can also be jailed in the UK before trial, it’s called remand.

You seem to be saying that it would be better if criminals could escape justice by crossing national borders, what kind of message does that send out to potential felons?

Nov 3, 2008 - 9:34 am 42. roGER:

Carol Gould writes:

“I think you misinterpreted my article. I am trying to illustrate the brilliance of the British intelligence services and police at thwarting some colossal and horrific terror plots.”

This is disengenous to say the least – the article is a hysterical and rather paranoid rant in favour of locking people up without charge for 42 days, and a rather ugly attack on Andrew Gilligan.

Nov 5, 2008 - 6:00 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: