How many times have you heard this statement after a terrorist attack on innocent people in a public setting:
“The perpetrator was known to police.”
Such is the case again in Manchester, England, where some pathetic, brainwashed malcontent decided to put himself out of his misery and take out as many people as possible with him — this time children attending an Ariana Grande concert.
That’s basically what ISIS and its devotees are all about: pathetically unhappy people who can’t bear to see anybody else enjoying their lives.
One report I read this morning said the weapon of destruction used was a nail/shrapnel bomb that had to be constructed by someone with a certain skill and talent for making these things. It said the suicide bomber probably didn’t actually make the bomb because terrorist cells need the bomb makers to make more; so, cells use the most worthless pieces of human excrement in their ranks as suicide bombers.
And this particular piece of garbage was “known to police.” One can only suppose that he wasn’t being detained by the legal system because they didn’t have grounds — and to hold him in jail because he might pose a threat would be a violation of his civil rights.
Ditto for so many of the other terrorists who have committed such acts. They were known to police, seen as possible threats, but not detained.
And, you know, authorities in Britain, France, Germany, the United States, Canada and many other countries undoubtedly see many other people as threats who could stage terrorist attacks against civilians in public places. But, legally, they can’t round them all up and detain them.
Something is wrong with that picture. Do you think ISIS and its devotees are exploiting it? Do you think they are laughing at Western nations?
And it is probably going to get worse, unless authorities decide to suspend civil rights and round up the ISIS sympathizers.
OK, I can hear some civil rights advocates howling now. They want none of that. On principle, they would sooner see innocent children murdered than suspend the civil rights of ISIS sympathizers.
And that is part of the problem here. ISIS and its devotees are exploiting this weakness in our system. So even when the head of the monster is cut off — when the ISIS leader is killed, which is inevitable — the ISIS cells will continue to proliferate. The only way to stop them is to be proactive, to weed them out before they can commit terrorist acts. If it means suspending their civil rights, so be it.
This is war. It’s time the West weeded out the enemy within its borders rather than be more concerned about their civil rights. Round them up, and hold them till doomsday.
Photo: United Airlines Flight 175 crashes into the south tower of the World Trade Center complex in New York City during the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Source: Wikipedia
There’s no innocent anyone in this conflict, They are waging war 6th century style, where it’s muslims vs others and not like the “civilized” european conflicts where it’s military vs military. Also this conflict is highly asymmetric in nature, and they are using tactics that work well.
But they can never win the war. They will never topple Western civilization and institute their 6th-century regimes. The most they can do is kill innocent children and adults in acts of cowardice.
Unfortunately it’s more complex than that, their immediate goal is for us to leave the region to them so they can build their Califate. To discourage us from interfering.
“Detention Without Trial” has a history, none of it marked by either rounding success or popular fondness. See the recent history of the IRA and N Ireland to the end of the last century. It was eventually abandoned as being counter-productive after many years.
One of the countries that criticised the use of it was the UK’s erstwhile supposed strongest ally; the United States. If it was introduced there to counter Islamic terrorism, it would also have to be introduced for the white population to counter the next David Koresh, Ted Kaczynski, TImothy McVeigh, Dylann Roof to name just but a few of the more obvious examples. Heck, if you are into prevention, you would have to round up every last Trump supporter who still believe he is the next Messiah and has threatened to start (another) civil war if their juvenile President is ever impeached. Come to think of it, given the number of white people out there with grievances who might prove to be a threat, why not round up the whole of the white population of the US and put them into detention camps, just in case! Surely that would be a sensible precaution?
As far as Canada is concerned, wasn’t there this guy, what was his name? Oh yes, Alexandre Bissonnette.
But I guess you figured all that out before penning you article. The people who seriously suggest the removal of civil rights haven’t an iota of intelligence or imagination to figure out in what context their civil rights might be removed from them.
I’m only talking about suspects who are “known to police,” i.e. known for their radical ideology and ISIS leanings.
“Known to police”… Where do you draw the line?
Is there enough room in the jails for all those “known to police”?
If we suspend civil rights, don’t we become them? And, isn’t that the terrorists’ goal?
This is a war. And in wartime, we need to take extraordinary measures, such as suspending civil rights — especially for individuals we think might blow themselves up at a pop music concert attended by kids.
We can build more jails for them. (Note that I am not saying we should shoot them.)
Ending our civil rights is exactly what the terrorists want.
I’m only talking about rounding up the “known” suspects.