2 explosions in Manchester Arena - CONFIRMED Fatalities.

[Xandrigity]

Hey people that casually say ''he is a bad guy, he does something suspect and should be arrested on the spot'' (I know that the ''detail'' that he is a british born citizen is irrevelant for some people, who consider that they are ''real'' (white) and ''fake'' (non white) citizens in a country), let's put the question of robbing the rights of citizen ''because he look suspect'' on a way that will matter to people

Imagine it's your precious guns and CSA flags that are taken from you because ''you act suspect''.

He was already on the watchlist. Already known to support Isis and Al Queda and suicide bombers. I guess we will give him a pass though.

[Endus]

This guy just got back from Libya and had already been on the radar before the trip. The missed opportunity was when he arrived back. When he re entered the U.K. That was when he should have been picked up and stringently interviewed. The leader of his mosque said he was radicalized before the trip and supported suicide bombers. Supported Isis ect. There were plenty of missed opportunities here.

What, exactly, do you think that would accomplish?

He's a British citizen, so you can't deport him or refuse him entry.

Unless he literally confessed to plotting a criminal act, during that interview, it wouldn't give you anything you could do anything about. You need evidence to arrest someone you think might be plotting something like this, not just a hunch, and that's all you've got, at that point.

Making statements supporting ISIS and such is worrisome and terrible, yes, but it's also, for the most part, free speech. You might disagree with his message (hell knows I do, in this hypothetical), but unless that speech is itself criminal in some way (and for the most part, it wouldn't be), it just means you should keep an eye on him, not that you can arrest him pre-emptively.

It's terrible and tragic when events like this happen. It's similarly awful when school shootings occur, or serial killers stalk the streets. These are terrible things. But one of the absolutely fundamental principles underscoring life in developed nations is that you're innocent until proven guilty of a crime. The State needs cause to intervene in these circumstances, and "a good hunch" isn't enough. Pushing for people to be tossed away for ideological differences alone is a frightening step to take, no matter how vehemently you disagree with that particular ideological outlook.

That's the consequence of the common law system; we presume innocence, and need actual grounds to convict people and lock them up. We don't arrest people for "wrongthink", even if that "wrongthink" is applauding terrorism, which we can all agree is a fairly terrible thing to believe. Until they actually DO something, engage in some actual plot, actually take steps towards that plotting or execution, you don't have any grounds to go after them.

What you're advocating is literally a police state. There's a reason that concept is portrayed as a dystopic nightmare. Because it is one. Pushing our entire society into committing heinous evils against hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of innocent people, on the hope that it can prevent some heinous evils by some criminals in the long run, is not a move towards reducing the horrors perpetrated on others. It's just declaring that some people are an oppressed caste and the heinous evils you do to them somehow "don't count", which is the same kind of nonsense that justified every evil empire in history.

Until you've got evidence to charge them with some particular action, they're an innocent in the eyes of the law, like anyone. You don't get to treat them differently because you really dislike their ideological views. That way lies a madness far worse than the evils you're trying to prevent.

[Freighter]

He's a British citizen, so you can't deport him or refuse him entry.

There is absolutely nothing that can stop a country from refusing entry.

Making statements supporting ISIS and such is worrisome and terrible, yes, but it's also, for the most part, free speech. You might disagree with his message (hell knows I do, in this hypothetical), but unless that speech is itself criminal in some way (and for the most part, it wouldn't be), it just means you should keep an eye on him, not that you can arrest him pre-emptively.

Free speech shouldn't be protected. Especially not when it's speech that is showing support for terrorist factions. You people need to stop worrying so much about human rights when it's clearly detrimental to you.

The State needs cause to intervene in these circumstances, and "a good hunch" isn't enough.

They'll intervene here before there's solid evidence if they suspect someone of preparing for such things.

[Northern Goblin]

Actually Endus, there's laws here that can detain him on returning from certain countries on a watch list, I don't recall off the top of my head if they can refuse return of entry but they certainly can instantly bring you in for questioning because you've returned from certain hotspots, but I digress from my point of posting.

I've had several days to gather my thoughts before commenting here. Manchester is my home city, the Arena is a place where from my childhood, through my teenage years and into my early adult life I have so many memorable and happy moments.

Each weekend I use to get the train to Victoria station directly below the arena, and hang out with friends on the gardens outside of the arena-cum-station building. It's a place that holds a special place for me growing up.

To think so many young people went out that night, to create their own memories to live with them forever, only to have them turn to nightmares is heartbreaking.

To know some of those children will never return home, and others still are in great suffering and risk is gutwrenching.

And knowing the person was local, had grown up there and plotted this knowing their victims would be mostly children leaves me with a bitter taste of contempt that lacks words, and if they existed would easily break forum rules to post them.

I have friends who's loved ones were caught up in this evil act, thankfully alive, though scared, shaken and one who still may not fully recover her hearing. I only wish that rather than stooping to petty squabbles and tit for tat arguments as if this were just some ongoing game amongst some people, and I don't mean here specifically, but in the greater socio-political commentary world in general, that people's first thoughts and actions were to be in a show of solidarity with those affected, and defiance against those responsible, and not some stupid game of one-upmanship that ultimately means fuck all.

The urge to scream at so many people "Congratulations you're right on the internet, and no one cares" is at an all time high. So I won't be partaking in further debate here, but I wanted to take the opportunity to share my thoughts, and if this community can do me a solid? Try to remember at the end of this there are a lot of parents burying children, and in some cases, children without parents who are blaming themselves, because their parents died purely coming to collect them from a concert.

Imagine if anyone who lost someone read what you all are posting. Imagine if you were that someone reading what you are posting, and show some compassion. Thank you.

[Xandrigity]

Not caring about human rights is detrimental to us...

Life > free speech

[Freighter]

Not caring about human rights is detrimental to us...

Not at all. You're caring too much about it to the point it's detrimental to your societies. You allow people to sow division, to cause conflict with speech. Speech is more dangerous than actions if you do not control it as it could plant seeds in peoples minds, it can provoke violence.

[Xandrigity]

Feelings and political correctness, the downfall of civilization.

[Freighter]

I'll take division over violent oppression at the hands of the government.

Do you think there's violent oppression in singapore?

[Violent]

You are weaponizing tragedy for political purposes.
And then ask for respect? pathetic.
/smh.

Yet people "weaponize", (lol did using that word make you feel like you're in some movie?) Their religious views to justify killing others, and you're like "Oh well, to each their own."??

[Snorkles]

"A Muslim community worker who knew the Manchester bomber said they warned officials that he appeared to support terrorism."

Well, better just ignore that I guess.

Seriously, cases like this need a much tougher stance.

And there was a very clear trigger for it too - his mate was stabbed to death in an apparent hate crime and he was literally vowing revenge.

I mean how many red flags did they need?

[Violent]

And there was a very clear trigger for it too - his mate was stabbed to death in an apparent hate crime and he was literally vowing revenge.

I mean how many red flags did they need?

Apparently one giant flag, red with the blood of innocent victims.

[Deleted]

The first few pages of this thread are just infuriating. You have people making jokes about the whole thing, saying it's a sound popping near a speaker and right wingers trampling people to death as a result. It really is fucked up. These people who will instantly try any kind of defence and even make light hearted comedy of it are almost as bad as the evil people committing these atrocious acts. "We will carry on as normal and not let them win" yeah whatever... lets try saying that to the parents of the 8 year old who died. I'm pretty sure they feel quite defeated.

The benefits of multiculturalism are worth the loss of life! What benefits exactly? It's multiculturalism that is causing the issue. Certain people do not and have no intention of integrating into modern western civilisation

[smegmage]

Free speech is necessary for life. You'll gladly sell your rights now in a shortsighted attempt to not have to be afraid, but when you weaken your rights, you invite ever more serious abuses to be committed against you. Once you decide that safety is more important than free speech in some broad sense, it's only a matter of time before the erosion of your rights that you hailed as your savior becomes the instrument of your demise at the hands of an intolerant state.

Except it's not necessary for life, it's beneficial to prosperous societies if kept in check.

Nearly every nation around the world already censors speech to some degree, true free speech rarely occurs because there are avenues for it to breed hate and violence.

[Freighter]

Life lived under the thumb of an easily offended despot is no life at all.

Life is pretty swell in singapore. It's a pretty good place to live.

[Endus]

There is absolutely nothing that can stop a country from refusing entry.

When you're a citizen of that country?

International human rights treaties that nearly everyone is signatory to says you're wrong. Even if Adolph Hitler resurrected himself tomorrow and stated he was going to kick off the Fourth Reich, Germany wouldn't be able to refuse him entry. At best, they could arrest him once he's on German soil, if they've got grounds.

Free speech shouldn't be protected.

At least you're open in your personal hostility to Western values, I guess?

Actually Endus, there's laws here that can detain him on returning from certain countries on a watch list, I don't recall off the top of my head if they can refuse return of entry but they certainly can instantly bring you in for questioning because you've returned from certain hotspots, but I digress from my point of posting.

Sure, detain for questioning, but that was apparently done in this case. The issue is that unless they voluntarily confess to something actionable, you can't hold them just because they visited a certain country. And they definitely cannot refuse entry; like I said, at best, they can arrest you immediately, but citizens being able to re-enter their home country is one of those core internationally-recognized principles that pretty much no one disagrees with.

It's like with a school shooting, to take this away from an issue that's so heavily political for a moment. The angry loner kid who mutters to himself all the time is likely a problem. Maybe he brought a knife to school one day and he got suspended. This is all reason to keep an eye on him, but you can't just expel him because he's being weird and antisocial. Until he actually DOES something that crosses the line, you have to try and reach him in other ways. And the problem is, that moment when they cross the line is usually when they start shooting, or in this case, when the bomb goes off. It's tragic, but that doesn't mean they had grounds to take action before this.

Imagine if anyone who lost someone read what you all are posting. Imagine if you were that someone reading what you are posting, and show some compassion. Thank you.

That's one reason I held off commenting as long as I did, while tempers were high. And why I tried to re-affirm consistently that these attacks are horrific and tragic. I just don't see how attacking the human rights of hundreds of thousands of innocent people is a reasonable response to these kinds of horrible events.

Frankly, it's throwing away the principles we supposedly stand for, in favor of principles more akin to those of the terrorists.

[apeiron1234]

"A Muslim community worker who knew the Manchester bomber said they warned officials that he appeared to support terrorism."

Well, better just ignore that I guess.

Seriously, cases like this need a much tougher stance.

This is the problem. Even when muslims alert officials of possible terrorism they almost do nothing. This has been the case for a while. Tragic!

[Freighter]

When you're a citizen of that country?

International human rights treaties that nearly everyone is signatory to says you're wrong. Even if Adolph Hitler resurrected himself tomorrow and stated he was going to kick off the Fourth Reich, Germany wouldn't be able to refuse him entry. At best, they could arrest him once he's on German soil, if they've got grounds.

Without enforcement human rights are just text on paper. Who would act against a country denying a terrorist entry? Are you willing to go to war against a country due to something like that if they do not fall in line?

At least you're open in your personal hostility to Western values, I guess?

Sure, I don't see why I should care about western values.

[Deleted]

Endus you are one of the biggest extreme left bollocks spouting everyone is innocent until they've killed 50 people twats there is. If someone leaves the country to go to some suspect region like Syria they should not be allowed back in for safety reasons. It's usually always the people who leave and go away and get converted that come back to murder people. Fuck a debate. It's past that, I wish I could just give you a right hook. You are as dangerous as a terrorist because you want to enable them regardless of what they do.


Infracted. Name calling and threatening with violence is not okay.

[Endus]

Without enforcement human rights are just text on paper.

So are laws against murder.

Unfortunately for your argument, these things are enforced.

Who would act against a country denying a terrorist entry? Are you willing to go to war against a country due to something like that if they do not fall in line?

See, now you're changing the argument. Because this guy wasn't a terrorist when he re-entered. If he were, you'd have grounds to arrest him as he came in.

The entire issue here is that you're pushing to arrest innocent civilians because of prejudice. And just prejudice. Because if you had any actual evidence that any individual had committed such an attack or was planning one, you'd have enough to arrest them anyway.

[Freighter]

So are laws against murder.

Unfortunately for your argument, these things are enforced.

In what way are human rights enforced if a country decides to ignore it?