« Previous | Main | Next »

Fighting radicals with the law

Leonardo Rocha | 09:26 UK time, Thursday, 8 November 2007

Can you legislate effectively against radicalism, against Islamism? Well, the British government think they can.

The latest proposal on the table is to allow the police to hold "terror suspects" for 56 days without charge.

Current legislation in Britain, created to combat the IRA, gives the police 28 days to question anyone they think is a terrorist.

The US had the Patriot Act, other countries have been using the law to stop radicals. But does it work? Can the law help prevent radicalism? That's something we'll probably be talking about today. Send us your views, post your comments here on the blog.


You might think the government in Britain would have overall support for tougher legislation against radicals. But that's not the case.

Many in the opposition say damaging civil liberties will have a negative impact.

Of course extremists and preachers of hate will seek to radicalise youngsters within their communities whatever we do. But surely we have learnt by now that breahtless talk about the "war on terror" or sloppy anti-terror legisltion gives them needless additional ammunition with which to sustain their twisted grievances?

Nick Clegg, opposition MP, Liberal Democrat

Different countries face this challenge in different ways. Look at Pakistan, or Israel, or Lebanon. Join the conversation, send us your views.


First Ukraine, with its Orange Revolution. Then the Tulip Revolution of Kyrgyzstan.

Now Georgia, and the Rose Revolution going wrong.

A state of emergency declared on the 90th anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution.

What's wrong with all these revolutions? Can we say the Rose Revolution is over? Who's to blame?

Georgia, like Ukraine, points the finger at Moscow. But it may not be that simple.

Onnik Krikorian says in his blog
that it's just too easy to put all the blame on the traditional Russian enemy. And convenient too. What about corruption, bad management, poor economic performance?

Are we just too impatient these days? Do we run out of patience before the flowers of the revolution bloom? Or do the leaders change once they're in power?


Out of nowhere, many will say. Who could have expected a school shooting, Columbine and Virginia Tech style, in a peaceful Finnish town?

Others will say was just a matter of time. Finland comes third in the world in the number of guns per inhabitant (behind the US and Yemen).

Do guns cause violence? Is gun possession to blame for another random shooting incident?

We've discussed this in the programme before and it was always a hot conversation, to say the least.

If someone else at the Jokela High School in Tuusula had a gun, could they have shot at the killer and prevented the tragedy?

Is this something you'd like to talk about?

The Finnish killer posted a video of himself on the internet before the attack. He was holding a gun, facing the camera and saying: "I, as a natural selector, will eliminate all who I see unfit."

This was the final instalment of a series of videos on his own YouTube channel.

Could more careful monitoring of the internet have prevented this attack?


  • No comments to display yet.

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.