Germany monitoring returned jihadis

[Infinite Chaos]

German security services are monitoring about a dozen Islamic extremists who have returned from fighting in Syria and and are considered potential terror threats.Germany's domestic intelligence service said Wednesday that about 300 people — 280 men and 20 women — have left Germany for Syria since the start of unrest there more than two years ago.
"There's a growing problem from radicalized and battle-hardened returnees from Syria," Hans-Georg Maassen, the head of the intelligence service, said in a statement. "We have information on about a dozen people who have actively engaged in fighting in Syria. This has increased the risk of terrorist acts in Germany." Link.

The situation continues to grow: some 250 British jihadis have returned from Syria while others have been traced by various European security services to training camps in Egypt or even Somalia.

One group has received training from a former Dutch soldier nicknamed "chechclear" after a beheading in Chechnya though some of his trainees have since died in various action.

"Yilmaz / Chechclear, a former Dutch soldier, with British jihadists Mohammed el-Araj, left, and Choukri Ellekhlifi, right. Both Britons have since been killed"

Regarding calls for illegal travel - this has never worked in a Western democracy and German officials stated last year that -

the fighters could not be stopped from leaving Germany because it could not be proved that they were going to Syria, the officials said. Their passports could be confiscated, but frequently it was possible to travel to the Syrian border simply using an ID card.
"You can't mark their ID cards Jihadist or Salafist," a senior official said.

Equally, once they decide to return, travel across Europe is relatively easy.

Where now for Europe?

There needs to be greater consistency of approach - some countries (by population ratio to numbers of jihadis) face bigger problems than others (Belgium, Ireland and the Netherlands) while the UK is thought to have the largest number of jihadis.

NOTE:
In terms of "debate" - If I am asked a question I will respond, but I expect my questions to be answered too.

 

[joG]

The situation continues to grow: some 250 British jihadis have returned from Syria while others have been traced by various European security services to training camps in Egypt or even Somalia.

One group has received training from a former Dutch soldier nicknamed "chechclear" after a beheading in Chechnya though some of his trainees have since died in various action.

"Yilmaz / Chechclear, a former Dutch soldier, with British jihadists Mohammed el-Araj, left, and Choukri Ellekhlifi, right. Both Britons have since been killed"

Regarding calls for illegal travel - this has never worked in a Western democracy and German officials stated last year that -



Equally, once they decide to return, travel across Europe is relatively easy.

Where now for Europe?

There needs to be greater consistency of approach - some countries (by population ratio to numbers of jihadis) face bigger problems than others (Belgium, Ireland and the Netherlands) while the UK is thought to have the largest number of jihadis.

NOTE:
In terms of "debate" - If I am asked a question I will respond, but I expect my questions to be answered too.

A couple of hundred trained terrorists can do a lot of damage and even in a country, where individuals whereabouts and movements are as closely monitored by the police as in Germany, persons can easily enough submerge in populations friendly to their cause in preparation to their evil deeds.

 

[Ray410]

Seems to be political correctness verging on lunacy to allow active foreign soldiers into your country.

 

[PeteEU]

Seems to be political correctness verging on lunacy to allow active foreign soldiers into your country.

They are not foreign... that is the problem. They are German nationals plus they have not actually committed a crime in Germany or the EU.

 

[Andalublue]

They are not foreign... that is the problem. They are German nationals plus they have not actually committed a crime in Germany or the EU.

There is a precedent in British law that permits nationals who have committed crimes abroad to be prosecuted at home. I know Sweden has it, so perhaps Denmark does too. In Britain it's the Sexual Offences Act 2003. I think that this principle could be used to create a piece of legislation to deal with mercenaries and volunteers to conflicts abroad. Of course, I'm no lawyer, but the principle of crimes committed abroad being prosecuted at home has been solved for a different circumstance, so why not for this one?

 

[PeteEU]

There is a precedent in British law that permits nationals who have committed crimes abroad to be prosecuted at home. I know Sweden has it, so perhaps Denmark does too. In Britain it's the Sexual Offences Act 2003. I think that this principle could be used to create a piece of legislation to deal with mercenaries and volunteers to conflicts abroad. Of course, I'm no lawyer, but the principle of crimes committed abroad being prosecuted at home has been solved for a different circumstance, so why not for this one?

Sure, but as I said.. they have not committed a crime and wont have until there is legislation in place that makes certain acts a crime even when committed abroad.

There is of course the universal justice theory and the UK, Germany and others use this on certain fronts including on terror. However how the hell do you remotely prove it? Take the UK, it has universal justice when it comes to terror.. as of 2002 Terror Act.. but is what is happening in Syria terror or a civil war? How do you distinguish? How do you prove that one act is an act of terror and not an act of war?

Now Germany does not have universal justice on terror but does have it on war crimes and crimes against humanity, but again it comes down to proof.. and how the hell do you get that proof from an active war zone. You cant use evidence from the Syrian Government since that will only validate the Syrian position, and you cant use evidence from the opposition since that will taint them as terrorists and hence validate the Syrian governments position.... it is a catch 22.

That is why you need new legislation that makes the very act of going to Syria without government authorization a crime.

 

[Andalublue]

Sure, but as I said.. they have not committed a crime and wont have until there is legislation in place that makes certain acts a crime even when committed abroad. There is of course the universal justice theory and the UK, Germany and others use this on certain fronts including on terror. However how the hell do you remotely prove it?

Well, just as with sexual offences committed abroad, you still require evidence and testimony. Evidence that someone has travelled into a war zone without permission or licence would undoubtedly be hard to find, but the alternative is to punish people on the basis of hearsay and supposition. That should not be how crime and punishment works. That would be tyranny and the breakdown of the judicial process.

In intrigued by these articles telling us so precisely how many jihadis have returned from Syria plotting to commit acts of terrorism back home. If there's intelligence that they are planning acts back home, arrest them and detain them. In the UK it is already an offence to incite, even indirectly, acts of terror and to give or receive terrorist training. It is an offence to attend a place where terrorist training may be taking place whether at home or abroad. Why isn't this law being applied to those jihadis returning from Syria. If we know they've been there, and the intelligence services are claiming that they have returned trained and ready to commit acts of terrorism, then the Terrorism Act 2006 gives very wide-ranging powers to the authorities to detain, search and prosecute them. If they have no evidence or testimony that they have been there, or that they have received training, then why are they claiming that they have? Educated guessing?

 

[German guy]

If I read the statement by the security agency official correctly, he just says that these 300 fighters returning from Syria "increases" the risk of terror acts *in general*, based on the assumption that among the respective people, the number of people who are both radical islamists and ready for violence is relatively high.

Now that's probably an assumption that is true, yet it doesn't say anything about the respective individual. Well possible some of these people went there to fight against islamists and/or is an islamist who doesn't consider terror acts against Western states justified (but prefers fighting against secular dictators in the Muslim World).

At any rate, as long as the agencies keep an eye on these people and do act the moment they learn they're planning something, I feel sufficiently safe.

 

[Serenity]

Foreign Correspondent aired an interview with Yilmaz a few weeks ago.

You can watch and listen for yourself what he has to say and draw your own conclusions.

@ 2.30.

Look a little bit further than what people show you, or what people try to show you. Try to investiage for yourself. Open your heart, open your eyes to what's going on over here and maybe you'll change your mind when you see that many many many of the people here came here for the right reasons. You can't just sit and watch hundred and hundreds of thousands of people getting slaughtered and you're just.......i feel sorry for the people at home, that's my honest opinion. How can you be sitting at home...

“They told me that 90 percent of the recruits who came to Syria had never fired a single bullet, much less been on a battlefield. But they were fighting for a noble cause. They wanted me to give them some tips and tools, so that when it came to a firefight they would know what they were doing.

“People are being slaughtered here every day and yet nobody does anything. So when jihadists come to fight for the oppressed Syrian people why is that a problem? I feel sorry for those people who just sit at home and watch. How can you be sitting at home?”

Calm, rational, open and speaking impeccable English – the very opposite of the fanatical caricature – Yilmaz was filmed for the programme training the masked newcomers while still wearing his old Dutch army fatigues, complete with name tag, now topped with a jihadist beret. He said what he missed most was his family – although he chatted with them regularly on Skype.

Asked why the recruits he was training wore masks, he said it was to avoid “negative consequences” for their families at home in their native countries if they were identified.

As regards suggestions by security services that he and other jihadists he trained might return to Europe traumatised and ready to attack their native countries, he replied: “No. I came here for Syria and for Syria only.” He added: “That’s not the mentality of most of the people who come here. Most people come here prepared to die. Going back home is not part of my perspective. The Netherlands, Europe . . . that’s all a closed chapter for me now.”

 

[Infinite Chaos]

-- That is why you need new legislation that makes the very act of going to Syria without government authorization a crime.

And as has been repeatedly shown to you - such legislation doesn't work. The Americans couldn't do it over Cuba for 40+ years and the hooligans case you tried to build stops all travel anywhere - not just conflict zones.

Strange that you see something various legal minds have failed to spot over 40 years?

-- At any rate, as long as the agencies keep an eye on these people and do act the moment they learn they're planning something, I feel sufficiently safe.

I just hope Germany has the funds for this long term security challenge. Nobody should underestimate the resources needed to monitor all the individuals involved.

 

[German guy]

I just hope Germany has the funds for this long term security challenge. Nobody should underestimate the resources needed to monitor all the individuals involved.

Hey, NSA easily does that with millions of people, so 300 shouldn't be a big problem, right?

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Hey, NSA easily does that with millions of people, so 300 shouldn't be a big problem, right?

That's electronic surveillance of telephones - we need feet on the ground for the other part, we need people willing to put their lives at risk inside circles and we need the local community to engage.

 

[Gardener]

That's electronic surveillance of telephones - we need feet on the ground for the other part, we need people willing to put their lives at risk inside circles and we need the local community to engage.

I highlighted the more difficult aspect in regards to allowing these Jihadists back into any European country in that their very presense acts to radicalize others and intimidate those who are more moderate. Since their fellow Muslims are the firct victims of their hatred, by very nature the engagement of that local community becomes more difficult.

I would liken the situation to living in neighborhoods ruled by organized crime. Whoever testifies against the crime bosses knowing the liklihood is very great that they will die if they do?

 

[PeteEU]

Well, just as with sexual offences committed abroad, you still require evidence and testimony. Evidence that someone has travelled into a war zone without permission or licence would undoubtedly be hard to find, but the alternative is to punish people on the basis of hearsay and supposition. That should not be how crime and punishment works. That would be tyranny and the breakdown of the judicial process.

In intrigued by these articles telling us so precisely how many jihadis have returned from Syria plotting to commit acts of terrorism back home. If there's intelligence that they are planning acts back home, arrest them and detain them. In the UK it is already an offence to incite, even indirectly, acts of terror and to give or receive terrorist training. It is an offence to attend a place where terrorist training may be taking place whether at home or abroad. Why isn't this law being applied to those jihadis returning from Syria. If we know they've been there, and the intelligence services are claiming that they have returned trained and ready to commit acts of terrorism, then the Terrorism Act 2006 gives very wide-ranging powers to the authorities to detain, search and prosecute them. If they have no evidence or testimony that they have been there, or that they have received training, then why are they claiming that they have? Educated guessing?

Well there is one piece of evidence that they cant deny... their passport. Usually some sort of stamp or visa is needed to even get near a conflict zone or even enter one.
They can of course travel on false papers and all that.. which is illegal too btw. But yes, evidence is needed and that will always be the main issue.

 

[PeteEU]

And as has been repeatedly shown to you - such legislation doesn't work. The Americans couldn't do it over Cuba for 40+ years and the hooligans case you tried to build stops all travel anywhere - not just conflict zones.

Strange that you see something various legal minds have failed to spot over 40 years?

And you just dont get it do you? It is the principle.... Banning travel to conflict zones and setting up a system that makes it possible to arrest and convict people might not do much, but the point there is a legal framework and we dont go against our basic principles of law and order... which is exactly what you and the present UK government is trying to do with the way they are handling it now. All it is doing is pissing off people and actually making even more "terrorists"..

 

[Infinite Chaos]

And you just dont get it do you? It is the principle.... Banning travel to conflict zones and setting up a system that makes it possible to arrest and convict people might not do much, but the point there is a legal framework and we dont go against our basic principles of law and order... which is exactly what you and the present UK government is trying to do with the way they are handling it now. All it is doing is pissing off people and actually making even more "terrorists"..

OK, I'll help you clarify this for yourself. You are so keen to see this policy - how exactly would it work and how exactly would you enforce it?

I'll poke the holes in once you are brave enough to commit yourself to a policy ideal that nobody else has made work.

Ever.

I highlighted the more difficult aspect in regards to allowing these Jihadists back into any European country in that their very presense acts to radicalize others and intimidate those who are more moderate. Since their fellow Muslims are the firct victims of their hatred, by very nature the engagement of that local community becomes more difficult.

I would liken the situation to living in neighborhoods ruled by organized crime. Whoever testifies against the crime bosses knowing the liklihood is very great that they will die if they do?

I agree what you say which is why I am so keen that we do not let any of these people back ever.

 

[PeteEU]

OK, I'll help you clarify this for yourself. You are so keen to see this policy - how exactly would it work and how exactly would you enforce it?

I'll poke the holes in once you are brave enough to commit yourself to a policy ideal that nobody else has made work.

Ever.

And what of the strategy being used now... you dont want these people in the UK again, but that is happening and they are being arrested on very flimsy evidence to say the least. So when the courts throw out the arrests, then who are you going to blame? The EU again?

As for making a policy.. I have stated it many times. Make it a crime punishable by fine and prison to travel to conflict zones as so defined by the government without their permission. Now it will be hard to actually enforce such an ban, since the evidence needed is not easy to get, but it is a hell of a lot easier than making up **** while you are going along .. which is exactly what the UK is doing at the moment.

Tell me this.. what is more credible evidence.. a passport with entry stamps to Lebanon or Turkey and even Syria plus witnesses testimony that they either went to the conflict zone or very near it.... or some photo that might have been taken some where in Syria and a secret witness that the government can disclose because it would threaten ongoing intelligence work.. hmm let me see.

Face it this is not an easy thing to deal with, and it is only made harder when governments like the UK dont use the rule of law but instead use secret courts and evidence and arrest people without trial and all that crap that government do... And on top of that it actually creates more problems.... one would think that at some point we learn from our mistakes over the last 30 years...

 

[Infinite Chaos]

And what of the strategy being used now... you dont want these people in the UK again, but that is happening and they are being arrested on very flimsy evidence to say the least. So when the courts throw out the arrests, then who are you going to blame? The EU again?

The ones who have returned have been arrested? I have seen nothing about that: I did see that a plot by returnees was foiled in August / September sometime.

-- As for making a policy.. I have stated it many times. Make it a crime punishable by fine and prison to travel to conflict zones as so defined by the government without their permission. Now it will be hard to actually enforce such an ban, since the evidence needed is not easy to get.

That is exactly what I've been telling you - even the US couldn't police or prosecute its ban over a 40 year period.

What is it you will actually do that the Americans and hundreds of American lawyers and police never managed to work out?

but it is a hell of a lot easier than making up **** while you are going along .. which is exactly what the UK is doing at the moment.

You think the ones on the democratic underground webpage are all made up?

So our security forces are just picking names at random, never checking on suspects or warning the Turks certain people are on the way.

Strange that you then think these same incompetent forces will suddenly enforce an unenforceable ban?

Tell me this.. what is more credible evidence.. a passport with entry stamps to Lebanon or Turkey and even Syria plus witnesses testimony that they either went to the conflict zone or very near it.... or some photo that might have been taken some where in Syria and a secret witness that the government can disclose because it would threaten ongoing intelligence work.. hmm let me see.

So you think a ban on travel would suddenly have people put entry stamps on their passports to oblige your idea? :lamo

Why do you think this never worked with Cuba?

Face it this is not an easy thing to deal with, and it is only made harder when governments like the UK dont use the rule of law but instead use secret courts and evidence and arrest people without trial and all that crap that government do... And on top of that it actually creates more problems....

I have a lot more faith in the UK security forces than you do and remember - these people can and have appealed their case from outside the UK before once they have lost citizenship.

one would think that at some point we learn from our mistakes over the last 30 years...

You're out by 10 years - the US never made their travel ban work in 40 years.

 

[PeteEU]

The ones who have returned have been arrested? I have seen nothing about that: I did see that a plot by returnees was foiled in August / September sometime.

Where have you been the last week? It was all over the news of arrests of Muslims who were suspected of going to Syria to get training and all that. Even a former GITMO detainee was arrested.

That is exactly what I've been telling you - even the US couldn't police or prosecute its ban over a 40 year period.

The US never tried to police the ban.. a big difference. The ban it self was more political, plus it was ONLY the US wanting such a ban. My idea could easily be a cross EU ban, which would give it much more firepower so to say.

You think the ones on the democratic underground webpage are all made up?

Who knows.. the key to winning any war these days is controlling the narrative. Face photos, photos taken out of context.. happens all the time. Plus it is hardly admissible in a court of law... well in a normal court of law.

So our security forces are just picking names at random, never checking on suspects or warning the Turks certain people are on the way.

Strange that you then think these same incompetent forces will suddenly enforce an unenforceable ban?

Who knows!? Would not be the first time. And again, you control your borders no?

So you think a ban on travel would suddenly have people put entry stamps on their passports to oblige your idea? :lamo

Err that is how they do things, even without a travel ban. To get to Syria you need to go through certain countries that require visa and stamps.. just saying. Sure they can have second passports and even illegal fake passports, but that happens also now and is illegal (the fake passport part).

Why do you think this never worked with Cuba?

It was never enforced.

I have a lot more faith in the UK security forces than you do and remember - these people can and have appealed their case from outside the UK before once they have lost citizenship.

A process that we agree on in principle. But again the whole legal process is a mess with zero transparency, which is the fundamental problem. Often the accused cant even see the evidence against them for god sake.

Any ways we are going around and around in circles. This debate is getting stale

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Where have you been the last week? It was all over the news of arrests of Muslims who were suspected of going to Syria to get training and all that. Even a former GITMO detainee was arrested.

Ah, you mean Moazzam Begg. I posted a thread on that. Your charge is that he is arrested on "flimsy evidence." (Your post above)

Speaks volumes that any action against jihadis in the UK is a bad thing then? Do you and your supporters simply want these guys to do whatever they want in Europe and we just look the other way?

-- The US never tried to police the ban.. a big difference. The ban it self was more political, plus it was ONLY the US wanting such a ban. My idea could easily be a cross EU ban, which would give it much more firepower so to say.

Um they did police the ban, hence 150,000 traveled to Cuba each year by a variety of means rather than official ones.

Who knows!? Would not be the first time. And again, you control your borders no?

We don't control travel within Europe.. you know very well it is pretty easy to get from one part of the EU to another without a passport.

-- Err that is how they do things, even without a travel ban. To get to Syria you need to go through certain countries that require visa and stamps.. just saying. Sure they can have second passports and even illegal fake passports, but that happens also now and is illegal (the fake passport part).

That's just naive.

Illegal immigration at Europe

You think it's so hard to cross the European border?

-- It was never enforced.

Not for want of trying.

Cuba Sanctions

-- A process that we agree on in principle. But again the whole legal process is a mess with zero transparency, which is the fundamental problem. Often the accused cant even see the evidence against them for god sake.

Reasons explained to you by Gardener, gunner and others. We'd simply give out the identity of intelligence sources and we'd run out those in no time if they were exposed to the glare of publicity.

-- Any ways we are going around and around in circles. This debate is getting stale

Agreed, you have no leg to stand on and your position is untenable. We're done.

 

[PeteEU]

Ah, you mean Moazzam Begg. I posted a thread on that. Your charge is that he is arrested on "flimsy evidence." (Your post above)

Speaks volumes that any action against jihadis in the UK is a bad thing then? Do you and your supporters simply want these guys to do whatever they want in Europe and we just look the other way?

No one is saying look the other way, far from it. But charge them with a freaking crime done in your own country not on some supposedly done in a conflict zone in a far far away country.

Um they did police the ban, hence 150,000 traveled to Cuba each year by a variety of means rather than official ones.

And no one travelled from the US directly to Cuba.. they had to go through 3rd countries to get there. Now unlike Syria, no one but the US wanted to enforce this ban. The rest of the planet worked against the US... on Syria and other conflict zones that wont be an issue. I have no doubt that almost every country in the region would gladly hand over all the travel information they got on these types and even help in stopping them.

We don't control travel within Europe.. you know very well it is pretty easy to get from one part of the EU to another without a passport.

You cant enter the UK without showing your passport. Why do you care what happens in Europe.. you are an island that is isolationist and can control the borders. Just look at the que's in Calais on a daily basis.....

That's just naive.

Illegal immigration at Europe

You think it's so hard to cross the European border?

Oh now we are talking about illegal immigrants all of a sudden? And the UK is a ****ing island, and very easy to police. You have limited in and out points. Now across Europe it is another issue, but dont come here and complain about illegal immigrants when the UK is the unique situation it is relative to the rest of Europe.

Not for want of trying.

Cuba Sanctions

Oh yea like stealing money from Europeans who buy Cuban cigars... I know very well what the US is capable off.. but as usual the US only controls what is within its own borders. That they choose not to go after people who entered Cuba is not my problem. The law was there, but never used... guessing that it would have caused a political outrage since the Cuban ban was only put in place to please the American Cuban community.

Reasons explained to you by Gardener, gunner and others. We'd simply give out the identity of intelligence sources and we'd run out those in no time if they were exposed to the glare of publicity.

Yes yes I know, but it also pisses in the face of our basic democratic and legal rights when we do that crap. It does not take much to put this practice in place for every crime... in fact some claim that it is already happening.

Agreed, you have no leg to stand on and your position is untenable. We're done.

No you are the one with no leg to stand on. You are the one who wants to abuse the rights of people for being Muslim. You are the one who wants secret courts and all that.. just because they are Muslim. You are the ones that have implemented a law in the UK that gives the UK the right to arrest and throw in jail anyone who is SUSPECTED of terror offences ANYWHERE in the world.. and THAT is a problem since it goes against every principle of a law and order society out there.

Listen I want to stop these people, not only those that are now radicalised, but also stop more being created. But you dont do that by going against the basic principles of our society.... which is exactly what you want to do. I use to have respect on how the Brits handled the London bombings.. they did not go ape**** like the Americans and put in force draconian legislation (at least on the same scale) that took away basic rights... but that is changing slowly with every cluster**** of an attempt by the UK government to deal with the situation.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

No one is saying look the other way, far from it. But charge them with a freaking crime done in your own country not on some supposedly done in a conflict zone in a far far away country.

He has been charged with terrorism charges here - yet this was "flimsy" evidence in your eyes.

-- And no one travelled from the US directly to Cuba.. they had to go through 3rd countries to get there.

And you forget to add that it was hard to prove people were actually only going to visit aunties in Syria (no- Cuba). Either way, funny how that doesn't tell you that it is near impossible for a democratic country to stop its citizens doing some things once they leave their own borders?

-- Now unlike Syria, no one but the US wanted to enforce this ban. The rest of the planet worked against the US...

You what? All other countries worked against the US on Cuba for 40 years?

I have no doubt that almost every country in the region would gladly hand over all the travel information they got on these types and even help in stopping them.

Yeah, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon are all desperate to stop these guys? Do you think those going for training in Egypt and Somalia are also finding it difficult to get to Syria?

The only country on our side over there is Israel but that is an ME discussion.

-- You cant enter the UK without showing your passport

Ever heard of "illegal immigrants?" You think we cracked that little problem?

Why do you care what happens in Europe.. you are an island that is isolationist

We are part of Europe, freedom of movement laws. If a Danish jihadist decides to visit the UK how do you propose we stop them using EU travel laws?

-- and can control the borders

[/sigh] Even if we ignore illegals, you've obviously never been through customs and border control on a busy day. You also ignore the articles in the press about the problems at Heathrow last year.

Just look at the que's in Calais on a daily basis.....

Probably the honest ones if they are queuing.

-- Oh now we are talking about illegal immigrants all of a sudden?

Point was to illustrate that not all returning jihadis are going to do the right thing and try walking through passport control. We are doomed if europe's security forces are going to be as naive as you are about this.

And the UK is a ****ing island, and very easy to police.

Here we go again....

You have limited in and out points. Now across Europe it is another issue, but dont come here and complain about illegal immigrants when the UK is the unique situation it is relative to the rest of Europe

And if an illegal can get into Europe, they can travel where they like with relative ease - even to the UK.

-- Oh yea like stealing money from Europeans who buy Cuban cigars... I know very well what the US is capable off.. but as usual the US only controls what is within its own borders. That they choose not to go after people who entered Cuba is not my problem. The law was there, but never used... guessing that it would have caused a political outrage since the Cuban ban was only put in place to please the American Cuban community.

That's a very desperate way of acknowledging that it was an unenforceable ban.

-- Yes yes I know, but it also pisses in the face of our basic democratic and legal rights when we do that crap. It does not take much to put this practice in place for every crime... in fact some claim that it is already happening.

You failed to produce a workable alternative. Things aren't perfect and we have to do things that sometimes go against perfect ideals. I'm going to risk further misunderstanding on the level of your failure to understand why I linked the weakness of European boundaries at Greece and Turkey (not an EU country) by trying to say - in war for example, certain rights are not protected.

No you are the one with no leg to stand on

You failed to produce a viable solution or example that worked and I have no leg to stand on?

You're a comedian sometimes Pete.

-- You are the one who wants to abuse the rights of people for being Muslim

If a muslim or anyone wishes to live by the laws of our land, they are welcome. If they decide to go fight for another country and fight alongside a group whose sole purpose is the destruction of our society - particularly by targeting civilians or off duty soldiers then I have no truck with that.

Similarly, I support sharia law that resides within UK legal convention. The moment someone starts stoning others or cutting hands off because their version of sharia demands it then they are beyond the pale and have crossed a line.

It's really simple and clear cut. Stay within the law and you are OK.

You are the one who wants secret courts and all that.. just because they are Muslim.

Emotive but wrong. You knew that.

-- You are the ones that have implemented a law in the UK that gives the UK the right to arrest and throw in jail anyone who is SUSPECTED of terror offences ANYWHERE in the world.. and THAT is a problem since it goes against every principle of a law and order society out there.

We grasped a nettle that everyone else is going to have to deal with someday.

-- Listen I want to stop these people, not only those that are now radicalised, but also stop more being created.

That's reassuring, let's start having some concrete and workable solutions from you sometime.

-- But you dont do that by going against the basic principles of our society.... which is exactly what you want to do. I use to have respect on how the Brits handled the London bombings.. they did not go ape**** like the Americans and put in force draconian legislation (at least on the same scale) that took away basic rights... but that is changing slowly with every cluster**** of an attempt by the UK government to deal with the situation.

We'll survive very well without your support.