It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

TERRORISM: Ex-Police Commissioner: 200+ Al-Qaeda terrorists in UK

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 02:21 AM
link   
Former Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir John Stevens has told how 200 or more Al-Qaeda trained terrorists are on Britain's streets. The claim came in a written piece in The News of The World newspaper. He also said that opponents to the UK Governments Anti-Terror bill are naive because they haven't seen the intelligence reports.
 



news.bbc.co.uk
Former Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir John Stevens says more than 200 Al-Qaeda "terrorists" are operating in UK and the threat of attacks is real.

Sir John, writing in the News of the World, said militants trained by Osama bin Laden "fester" across the country.

But the Liberal Democrats accused him of sending "mixed messages" adding to an already "complicated situation".


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


This begs the question that if these people are known terrorists then why don't they arrest them now? Put them on trial, give your evidence and let the judges decide whether they are terrorists or not.

Its a tried and tested process which has served Britain for hundreds of years. The anti-terror bills that are trying to pass through parliament are unwarranted. The only reason I can see for these bills is to allow the Government to arrest and detain people when they have no proof whatsoever.

If they have proof then the courts should be used. Sensitive evidence has always been brought to court for crimes ranging from IRA terrorists to organized crime. To say your protecting your sources or techniques is to value them higher than our basic human rights. Something that I'm not prepared to forgo, terrorists or not.

If the bill goes through then what? Indefinite detention? If they are currently unwilling to share incriminating evidence with judges what will make them do it after this bill passes? When you detain some one how else can they incriminate themselves further i.e generate more evidence that they are indeed criminals? They cant so they are either detained forever or they are released and we are back to square one. Hows this a good scenario?

Also if this can be applied to terrorist criminals why cant it be applied to other serious crimes? If the politicians "think" that some one may carry out a bank robbery but doesn't have evidence or want to share its intelligence then can they too be detained? Police state!

Terrorist: who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities

The only people I can see using terror as a political weapon are the politicians. The biggest threat to our current way of life are the politicians that think our "human rights" are "getting in the way" of stopping some trumped up terrorist threat.

It was said best by President Roosevelt in his inaugural speech: "Theres Nothing to Fear but Fear Itself"

More tellingly and a worrying sign of the times is President W. Bush's words: "A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there's no question about it,"



[edit on 6-3-2005 by Banshee]




posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 03:14 AM
link   
Wow look at those edits, it was near impossible for me to remove any bias from the introductory paragraph. Thanks to it revolving around the ex-commissioners biased opinion in the first place


/me tries to glue hair back into scalp.


[edit on 6/3/05 by subz]



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 03:25 AM
link   
I guess to be non-biased around here you should have said "Al-Qaeda has 200 Heroic Freedom Fighters Stationed in the U.K."



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 09:24 AM
link   
Ok, if they are so sure about it, why aint these 200 al-quaida members behind bars already ?



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Countermeasures
Ok, if they are so sure about it, why aint these 200 al-quaida members behind bars already ?


Because of "political correctness" especially Tony Blair

Because i get the impression that Ethnic community members, equal opertunities groups and politicians, (mainly government backed groups) anyone who does not agree in general, wants publicity, or pro-longed media coverage will most likley claim "Its Racist" its happens all the time with everyone due to it been a multi-cultrual society, includes groups of all (Tony Blair kept throwing that word around, i remember when he was accusing anyone who does not agree with imigration is Racist, that was before he learned that Micheal Howards parents were Jews who came in the second world war) That shut him up and stubed him out (by the way Micheal Howard is an opposing political party leader, conservitives i think) the promise of takling Imigration is probly the biggest "staging point/vote" booster and i get the impression many people have possibly "strong" feelings about it in Britian

[edit on 6-3-2005 by Crash]



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 11:21 AM
link   
You have to wait for them to commit a crime. Its not fair you just lock up someone just because they think brits are scumbags, they have to act on it.

Oh who really cares anyway, Europe will be a muslim union of nations eventually. Just surrender to them.



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kinja
You have to wait for them to commit a crime. Its not fair you just lock up someone just because they think brits are scumbags, they have to act on it.

Oh who really cares anyway, Europe will be a muslim union of nations eventually. Just surrender to them.


Europe is a Scurge, a Trojan horse to the western world, if the Al-Quieda get their version of society on the west, then it will destroy the western culture forever, it should be delt with properly for the sake of the majority of westerners who enjoy THEIR way of life, we dont send in christians or buddahs to the middle east to try and force their way of life into the western way by bombing civilians because if the country in the middle east did have the capability they would use it back on the country if they knew they would win overall.

When its a government who does it (attacks a country) then the whole country of that government would be "punished"/attacked back (in some form or another) by the country that was attacked even if they dont represent its people, however with terrorism groups they are to politically correct to serve the masses

I only consider Europe the land mass, not the Birtish and offshore land masses sorrounding it

Unimployment in the "Union" with added imigration do not mix well together

why should we be "Punished" because of leaders forigen beliefs and cowardice in acting towards maters that really matter

[edit on 6-3-2005 by Crash]



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Looks like we europeans get to face the same problem as the americans: how much civil freedom do we have give up to ensure our freedom ?

tough call...



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Countermeasures
Looks like we europeans get to face the same problem as the americans: how much civil freedom do we have give up to ensure our freedom ?

tough call...


Yeah its a scam

If they delt with the problem before hand we would not be getting our "freedoms" supressed and taken away

Carnt be attacked by an Enemy that doesnt exist... just like you cannot be attacked within your own boarders by an enemy that can not set foot inside them

If we were been attacked by an country, not a group they would be assaulted back by now and probly erradicated one way or another (with indeviduals/splinter cells its the same as looking for a needle in a haystack)
except while we are looking through the "haystack" that needle can "stab" us time and time again before we find it.

Its then on to the next haystack thats been set up...

Our ansestors of the old world knew how to deal with such things (and they did)

However SOCIETYS VIEWS change on whats acceptable and whats not, Does not make it right or wrong... its what the majority of society portrays it to be...and anyone who does not agree and takes physical action/dishes out harsh words is an "extreemist"

[edit on 6-3-2005 by Crash]



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 01:33 PM
link   
I dont think racism or politically correctness has stopped anything with regards to these terrorists being arrested before. These new measures are entirely more severe and are targetted at Muslim radicals, its more racist than arresting all these supposed terrorists. You'll find its purely a lack of evidence thats stopping these terrorists from being arrested. Should our society give politicians or anyone the power to arrest/detain indefinately individuals with NO EVIDENCE GIVEN?

The major issues, which im suprised Howard or Kennedy hasnt jumped on, are what happens after the house detention? How long is the detention for and if they are released what was the threat in the first place? Are we going to see individuals locked up indefinately because the Government "suspects" them of conspiring to commit a crime? How is this acceptable in a modern Western country? How does society benefit from unproven detentions for indefinate lengths of time?

Lord help us

[edit on 6/3/05 by subz]



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 02:54 AM
link   
I've also been told that there are over 150+ in the Netherlands, the EU seems like a breeding place, and the one's that struck the WTC where educated in germany

[edit on 7-3-2005 by DJFiyaaBl8]



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 03:01 AM
link   
There is a problem of political correctness run amok in BOTH the U.S. and Europe. We will lose this war unless we realize the execution of it won't be a nice sanatized walk in the park. It's a clash of civilizations and we must be able to jail people for consorting with terrorists and going to training camps etc. before any attack since even a single attack can be devestating beyond belief.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 04:22 AM
link   
I have no qualms with that, use the courts for it. Give your evidence and if Muslims are unequally targeted by this, big deal. But its the concept of detaining people and offering no proof whatsoever that is terrifying. These powers have no checks or balances to ensure there is no misuse.

How could you make sure innocent people are not being locked up when its done in complete secret and you have no access to the courts to clear yourself.

Its arbitrary detention that bypasses our legal system completely. Its illegal in the purest sense of the word.

Also theres nothing in this bill that will stop terrorists more than without the bill. All it makes easier is that politicians can remove some one from society without having to worry about having any proof to do so. We wont be safer because of it, our liberty will literally be at the mercy of the Government.

[edit on 7/3/05 by subz]



posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 04:14 AM
link   
I think the reason we have not been touched by terrorists is because of our excellent intel, BBC, MI5, MI6, SAS the list continues and the fact the UK is built like a fortress and ANY terrorist(s) would be stupid to attack britain because we don't rant a rave about things we get jobs done if there is even a wiff of an attack i'm sure the secret services will take care of it.

Stevens thinks there's 200+ "Extreme" terrorists in the UK, well it is believable, but the intel services already know this, he is just getting some publicity out of it, notice how he is a "Former" police comissioner??

They won't attack britain too many of there own already live here. I'm not worried about britain being attacked.

People have them figured as cavemen but they certainly NOT in fact it was the US that trained them to take care of the soviets but it kinda back fired on the US. And who trained the US the British. Any american that denies this has got their "Patriot goggles" on and need's to go specsavers.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join