Is there anything intrinsically wrong in going abroad to fight for a cause you believe in? For example, like George Orwell did? Should Orwell have been "deported"? Or jailed for life?
In Orwell's time it wasn't a crime. It is now.
LA, what law is it and when was it introduced?
There may be others but s.17 Terrorism Act 2006 is one. In addition, any British subject who commits a murder abroad may be tried here (that has always applied and is not part of enti-terrorism legislation)
Is there anything intrinsically wrong in going abroad to fight for a cause you believe in? For example, like George Orwell did? Should Orwell have been "deported"? Or jailed for life?
In Orwell's time it wasn't a crime. It is now.
LA, what law is it and when was it introduced?
There may be others but s.17 Terrorism Act 2006 is one. In addition, any British subject who commits a murder abroad may be tried here (that has always applied and is not part of enti-terrorism legislation)
Is there anything intrinsically wrong in going abroad to fight for a cause you believe in? For example, like George Orwell did? Should Orwell have been "deported"? Or jailed for life?
In Orwell's time it wasn't a crime. It is now.
LA, what law is it and when was it introduced?
There may be others but s.17 Terrorism Act 2006 is one. In addition, any British subject who commits a murder abroad may be tried here (that has always applied and is not part of enti-terrorism legislation)
Usual playing up to the majority of the electorate who are utterly vacuous. UKIP will win seats based on xenophobia not on anything like sound ideology. Their current fiscal policy doesn't even add up. Where would you deport a British citizen to?
UKIP spout utter garbage but most people listen because they pan to what the media tell them. Ask any UKIP supporter about UKIP policies and beyond burn the foreigner they have not got a clue what their policies are.
Bullshit - so patronising it's unbelievable.
educate me then tell me what the ukip policy is on the NHS ?
Can you concisely and without scoring political points tell me the policy of any of the main 3 parties regarding the NHS?
Tories - sell
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH! So edgy mate!
Labour, spend money we don't have to give a shit service anyway, and then financially ruin the country in the process for decades to come!
Lib Dems - Give people enough Marijuana to never feel pain again.
See, we can all play this game!
Now, shall we be grown up and answer the question?
Who is trying to be edgy ? At least in not trying to be a smart arse. Tories are selling off the nhs, it's a fact.
Privatisation accelerated under the previous Labour Govt. The current Govt have simply maintained those levels.
It's rather like saying Blair / Brown were better for the manufacturing industry than Maggie. Despite that being quite the opposite.
Usual playing up to the majority of the electorate who are utterly vacuous. UKIP will win seats based on xenophobia not on anything like sound ideology. Their current fiscal policy doesn't even add up. Where would you deport a British citizen to?
UKIP spout utter garbage but most people listen because they pan to what the media tell them. Ask any UKIP supporter about UKIP policies and beyond burn the foreigner they have not got a clue what their policies are.
Bullshit - so patronising it's unbelievable.
educate me then tell me what the ukip policy is on the NHS ?
Can you concisely and without scoring political points tell me the policy of any of the main 3 parties regarding the NHS?
Broadly the Tories favour further privatisation of various aspects of the NHS (although they are internally divided), whereas Labour and the Lib Dems do not; the latter both believe that the founding principles of the NHS remain relevant today.
UKIP?
I am not a UKIP supporter but from what I understand they want to privatise large amounts of the NHS such as GPs surgeries, although they are more or less privatised already. They want to give you the option to "opt out" of the NHS, as well as a return to matrons etc.
Apparently they also want dental and eye checks to be free.
This is just what I have picked up from interviews and read about the place.
Is there anything intrinsically wrong in going abroad to fight for a cause you believe in? For example, like George Orwell did? Should Orwell have been "deported"? Or jailed for life?
Valid point but it's not quite the same.
The cause he fought for was not seen (at the time) as a direct threat to UK interests or our way of life.
Is there anything intrinsically wrong in going abroad to fight for a cause you believe in? For example, like George Orwell did? Should Orwell have been "deported"? Or jailed for life?
In Orwell's time it wasn't a crime. It is now.
LA, what law is it and when was it introduced?
There may be others but s.17 Terrorism Act 2006 is one. In addition, any British subject who commits a murder abroad may be tried here (that has always applied and is not part of enti-terrorism legislation)
Would that have been in place in the 1930s?
Sorry Chizz but I don't understand what you mean by 'that'. Clearly the 2006 Act wasn't in force (a clue is in the date:-)). If your question relates to British subjects being tried here for murders committed abroad then the answer is yes. Of course you need evidence of murder and a willingness on the part of the prosecution authorities to undertake a prosecution.
Is there anything cally wrong in going abroad to fight for a cause you believe in? For example, like George Orwell did? Should Orwell have been "deported"? Or jailed for life?
I've heard it all now.
Do you not think there is something very wrong when he/she returns home with these beliefs/ideology even more ingrained and enhanced and decides to blow up a bus your family are travelling on?!?
I could not really give a monkeys what they do out there but stop them returning for christ sake.
Of course there's something wrong in those instances! I was just drawing out the parallel between fighters today taking up arms in a foreign country (in which no British personnel are fighting) and fighters of a few decades ago, taking up arms in Spain.
It's interesting you say "I don't give a monkeys what they do out there, but stop them returning". Because (1) we don't know who they are, (2) if they've done nothing wrong, we have no reason to detain them, and (3) where do they go, if they can't return to their own country, ie the UK?
1. Only last night the news named about 6 of them, showed their pictures and the British City they originated from..I would suspect our services know a lot more than that.
2. We know why they've gone - to join the fight for their cause. If football fans can be held because they might to something or show intent to do something then surely so can these traitors.
3. More clued up people than me and you know what we can and can't do but I'd like to think we would do the most we legally can to stop them either returning or having their freedom when they do return.
think about it, they all travel to Turkey which is of course not a sanctioned country under UK legislation. Therefore the odd few will slip through the net unfortunately...
I've neither read nor heard what Nigel Farage has said, other than a brief scan of this thread, so cannot and will not comment on the rights and wrongs at this stage.
What I would say as an initial thought on the subject is that many British Asians in particular hold dual passports, the second being for their country of ethnic origin.
It might be that Mr Farage is suggesting that they return there rather than to Britain if they consider the British lifestyle so reprehensible.
think about it, they all travel to Turkey which is of course not a sanctioned country under UK legislation. Therefore the odd few will slip through the net unfortunately...
Thanks,
slightly different though as he says up to 300 might have come in.
It's not saying that we know who they are and have just let them come back in without any sanction.
Is there anything intrinsically wrong in going abroad to fight for a cause you believe in? For example, like George Orwell did? Should Orwell have been "deported"? Or jailed for life?
In Orwell's time it wasn't a crime. It is now.
LA, what law is it and when was it introduced?
There may be others but s.17 Terrorism Act 2006 is one. In addition, any British subject who commits a murder abroad may be tried here (that has always applied and is not part of enti-terrorism legislation)
Would that have been in place in the 1930s?
Sorry Chizz but I don't understand what you mean by 'that'. Clearly the 2006 Act wasn't in force (a clue is in the date:-)). If your question relates to British subjects being tried here for murders committed abroad then the answer is yes. Of course you need evidence of murder and a willingness on the part of the prosecution authorities to undertake a prosecution.
My fault: I was completely unclear! I was idly speculating as to whether Orwell might have been subject to the same laws as the British ISIS fighters, in respect of your comment about "...any British subject who commits a murder abroad may be tried here...". You've cleared that up - thank you!
On reflection, it's not worth going down the line of "is it murder if it's in a war", because that would get us - even for Charlton Life - a long way off track!
The arguments about what to do with returning jihadis is going to ring pretty hollow when attacks start happening in this country. Is protecting a citizens right to return to this country worth the lives of other citizens who are going to end up being killed? I just think we're hopelessly confused in this country when one set of rights bashes against another.
Of course maybe if we didn't meddle in other countries affairs we wouldn't be seen as "the bad guys" by the terrorists in the first place.
You just have to look at our response to the Egyptian massacres last year and Gaza this year and compare with how we responded to ISIS and Assad respectively to see why the un-radicalised on the ground in Iraq and Syria come to the conclusion that we're not the humanitarian force for good that we like to pretend we are and then become radicalised themselves.
And now we're talking about working with the Assad government to thwart ISIS. Our foreign policy is a mess with no focus other than chasing short term objectives whether that be arms sales, oil or regional influence related. How we get out of this vicious circle I don't know but really whatever any party says, while we carry on with our haphazard make-it-up-as-you-go-along policies I can't see anything changing.
Another good point was made above re: British and US citizens going to Israel to join the IDF against Gaza. The irony too is that we started off helping the rebels in Syria, then started condemning UK citizens who travelled to join them. The whole thing is one big mess and I'm not even just pointing the finger at Bush/Blair Obama/Cameron... we're reaping what we've sowed for the last few centuries. Depressing.
I've neither read nor heard what Nigel Farage has said, other than a brief scan of this thread, so cannot and will not comment on the rights and wrongs at this stage.
What I would say as an initial thought on the subject is that many British Asians in particular hold dual passports, the second being for their country of ethnic origin.
It might be that Mr Farage is suggesting that they return there rather than to Britain if they consider the British lifestyle so reprehensible.
I'm not sure if this is the case for India (I know that India is probably not the main country here, but as a British Asian the comment is pertinent to me). I believe that the UK Gov't would allow dual citizenship but the Indian Government some years ago withdrew the right for dual nationality.
On a couple of other points, it is very hard to put figures on how many people leave the UK to join the troubles as we do not record exits only entrants, therefore its a guess.
I went to an interesting talk by Michael Portillio recently, a member of the elite future Prime Ministers that never was club, recently joined by David Milliband. He made the statement that there was a secret agenda by the main parties to maintain immigration because we need the younger work force to maintain the economy of the country as the indigenous (white and non white) population aged.
I've neither read nor heard what Nigel Farage has said, other than a brief scan of this thread, so cannot and will not comment on the rights and wrongs at this stage.
What I would say as an initial thought on the subject is that many British Asians in particular hold dual passports, the second being for their country of ethnic origin.
It might be that Mr Farage is suggesting that they return there rather than to Britain if they consider the British lifestyle so reprehensible.
I'm not sure if this is the case for India (I know that India is probably not the main country here, but as a British Asian the comment is pertinent to me). I believe that the UK Gov't would allow dual citizenship but the Indian Government some years ago withdrew the right for dual nationality.
On a couple of other points, it is very hard to put figures on how many people leave the UK to join the troubles as we do not record exits only entrants, therefore its a guess.
I went to an interesting talk by Michael Portillio recently, a member of the elite future Prime Ministers that never was club, recently joined by David Milliband. He made the statement that there was a secret agenda by the main parties to maintain immigration because we need the younger work force to maintain the economy of the country as the indigenous (white and non white) population aged.
Portillio, the son of Spanish doctor who went into exile after the republicans, who he'd supported, lost the Spanish civil war.
Usual playing up to the majority of the electorate who are utterly vacuous. UKIP will win seats based on xenophobia not on anything like sound ideology. Their current fiscal policy doesn't even add up. Where would you deport a British citizen to?
UKIP spout utter garbage but most people listen because they pan to what the media tell them. Ask any UKIP supporter about UKIP policies and beyond burn the foreigner they have not got a clue what their policies are.
Bullshit - so patronising it's unbelievable.
educate me then tell me what the ukip policy is on the NHS ?
Can you concisely and without scoring political points tell me the policy of any of the main 3 parties regarding the NHS?
One policy was to introduce a flat rate charge for seeing your GP. Think it was about a tenner. Also to reintroduce smoking in all public areas and accelerate the current reforms.
UKIP are the right of the Tory party- no more. I rarely agree with David Cameron but these people are " Fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists" . Apart from Farrage there're isn't a descent politician amongst them and their policies are an unworkable joke.
Re the IS fighters - jail them for a very long time.
Usual playing up to the majority of the electorate who are utterly vacuous. UKIP will win seats based on xenophobia not on anything like sound ideology. Their current fiscal policy doesn't even add up. Where would you deport a British citizen to?
UKIP spout utter garbage but most people listen because they pan to what the media tell them. Ask any UKIP supporter about UKIP policies and beyond burn the foreigner they have not got a clue what their policies are.
Bullshit - so patronising it's unbelievable.
educate me then tell me what the ukip policy is on the NHS ?
Can you concisely and without scoring political points tell me the policy of any of the main 3 parties regarding the NHS?
One policy was to introduce a flat rate charge for seeing your GP. Think it was about a tenner. Also to reintroduce smoking in all public areas and accelerate the current reforms.
UKIP are the right of the Tory party- no more. I rarely agree with David Cameron but these people are " Fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists" . Apart from Farrage there're isn't a descent politician amongst them and their policies are an unworkable joke.
Re the IS fighters - jail them for a very long time.
Correct me if I am wrong but haven't you quoted UKIP policy on the NHS there, whereas @Huskaris was asking about the policies of the three mainstream parties?
Usual playing up to the majority of the electorate who are utterly vacuous. UKIP will win seats based on xenophobia not on anything like sound ideology. Their current fiscal policy doesn't even add up. Where would you deport a British citizen to?
Deport them to the country they have a greater affiliation to.
Broadly the Tories favour further privatisation of various aspects of the NHS (although they are internally divided), whereas Labour and the Lib Dems do not; the latter both believe that the founding principles of the NHS remain relevant today.
UKIP?
I am not a UKIP supporter but from what I understand they want to privatise large amounts of the NHS such as GPs surgeries, although they are more or less privatised already. They want to give you the option to "opt out" of the NHS, as well as a return to matrons etc.
Apparently they also want dental and eye checks to be free.
This is just what I have picked up from interviews and read about the place.
What UKIP think or want will be of no importance in a years time. They are today's protest vote.
Is there anything intrinsically wrong in going abroad to fight for a cause you believe in? For example, like George Orwell did? Should Orwell have been "deported"? Or jailed for life?
In Orwell's time it wasn't a crime. It is now.
LA, what law is it and when was it introduced?
There may be others but s.17 Terrorism Act 2006 is one. In addition, any British subject who commits a murder abroad may be tried here (that has always applied and is not part of enti-terrorism legislation)
Usual playing up to the majority of the electorate who are utterly vacuous. UKIP will win seats based on xenophobia not on anything like sound ideology. Their current fiscal policy doesn't even add up. Where would you deport a British citizen to?
UKIP spout utter garbage but most people listen because they pan to what the media tell them. Ask any UKIP supporter about UKIP policies and beyond burn the foreigner they have not got a clue what their policies are.
Bullshit - so patronising it's unbelievable.
educate me then tell me what the ukip policy is on the NHS ?
Can you concisely and without scoring political points tell me the policy of any of the main 3 parties regarding the NHS?
One policy was to introduce a flat rate charge for seeing your GP. Think it was about a tenner. Also to reintroduce smoking in all public areas and accelerate the current reforms.
UKIP are the right of the Tory party- no more. I rarely agree with David Cameron but these people are " Fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists" . Apart from Farrage there're isn't a descent politician amongst them and their policies are an unworkable joke.
Re the IS fighters - jail them for a very long time.
Correct me if I am wrong but haven't you quoted UKIP policy on the NHS there, whereas @Huskaris was asking about the policies of the three mainstream parties?
Yes I have quoted UKIP policy. Yes I know what he was asking for.
Comments
It's rather like saying Blair / Brown were better for the manufacturing industry than Maggie. Despite that being quite the opposite.
Apparently they also want dental and eye checks to be free.
This is just what I have picked up from interviews and read about the place.
The cause he fought for was not seen (at the time) as a direct threat to UK interests or our way of life.
2. We know why they've gone - to join the fight for their cause. If football fans can be held because they might to something or show intent to do something then surely so can these traitors.
3. More clued up people than me and you know what we can and can't do but I'd like to think we would do the most we legally can to stop them either returning or having their freedom when they do return.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/syria-civil-war-mi6-fears-the-jihadist-enemy-within-9554429.html
think about it, they all travel to Turkey which is of course not a sanctioned country under UK legislation. Therefore the odd few will slip through the net unfortunately...
What I would say as an initial thought on the subject is that many British Asians in particular hold dual passports, the second being for their country of ethnic origin.
It might be that Mr Farage is suggesting that they return there rather than to Britain if they consider the British lifestyle so reprehensible.
slightly different though as he says up to 300 might have come in.
It's not saying that we know who they are and have just let them come back in without any sanction.
On reflection, it's not worth going down the line of "is it murder if it's in a war", because that would get us - even for Charlton Life - a long way off track!
You just have to look at our response to the Egyptian massacres last year and Gaza this year and compare with how we responded to ISIS and Assad respectively to see why the un-radicalised on the ground in Iraq and Syria come to the conclusion that we're not the humanitarian force for good that we like to pretend we are and then become radicalised themselves.
And now we're talking about working with the Assad government to thwart ISIS. Our foreign policy is a mess with no focus other than chasing short term objectives whether that be arms sales, oil or regional influence related. How we get out of this vicious circle I don't know but really whatever any party says, while we carry on with our haphazard make-it-up-as-you-go-along policies I can't see anything changing.
Another good point was made above re: British and US citizens going to Israel to join the IDF against Gaza. The irony too is that we started off helping the rebels in Syria, then started condemning UK citizens who travelled to join them. The whole thing is one big mess and I'm not even just pointing the finger at Bush/Blair Obama/Cameron... we're reaping what we've sowed for the last few centuries. Depressing.
On a couple of other points, it is very hard to put figures on how many people leave the UK to join the troubles as we do not record exits only entrants, therefore its a guess.
I went to an interesting talk by Michael Portillio recently, a member of the elite future Prime Ministers that never was club, recently joined by David Milliband. He made the statement that there was a secret agenda by the main parties to maintain immigration because we need the younger work force to maintain the economy of the country as the indigenous (white and non white) population aged.
UKIP are the right of the Tory party- no more. I rarely agree with David Cameron but these people are " Fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists" . Apart from Farrage there're isn't a descent politician amongst them and their policies are an unworkable joke.
Re the IS fighters - jail them for a very long time.
Broadly the Tories favour further privatisation of various aspects of the NHS (although they are internally divided), whereas Labour and the Lib Dems do not; the latter both believe that the founding principles of the NHS remain relevant today.
UKIP?
I am not a UKIP supporter but from what I understand they want to privatise large amounts of the NHS such as GPs surgeries, although they are more or less privatised already. They want to give you the option to "opt out" of the NHS, as well as a return to matrons etc.
Apparently they also want dental and eye checks to be free.
This is just what I have picked up from interviews and read about the place.
What UKIP think or want will be of no importance in a years time. They are today's protest vote.
At last, cut out the bullshit, bury them.
How are you able to tell which have to gone to be terrorists and which have gone to fight against them?
Then throw them in a pit and piss on them