Oracle wrote:CopperLine wrote:Oracle wrote:An Iraqi colleague (Ph.D. student) was interned during the Gulf War for questioning.
No s/he was not interned. S/he may have been
detained, but was not interned. Internment is a particular form of adminisitrative detention - typically where no crime or breach is alleged against that class or set of people - applied to a whole class or set of subjects. The detention of an individual (or even several) Iraqi PhD student does not constitute internment. I followed closely the treatment in the UK of Iraqi (and other) nationals during the 1980s, 1990s to the present (being a member of various HR organisations and advocacy groups) and I can tell you for sure that no Iraqis were interned. (They were abused in many other ways, but not internment)
You, Oracle, started a thread advocating internment of civilian (a class or set of subjects) "partitionists" (a class or set of subjects) despite the fact that they had not committed any crime or breach of law (either of RoC or international). This is the kind of thing that fascists advocate, hence accusing you of being a fascist.
The student was interned for some days and then had to report their whereabouts for several weeks.
So NOT INTERNED, as I said.
Why don't you read what
I wrote instead of making wild accusations just so that you can answer yourself! I'm not talking about taking away
privileges from innocent people but from those ...
opening post wrote: ... who present a risk to Cyprus' future by their constant promotion and peddling of anti-Cypriot propaganda as well as overtly and covertly supporting and distributing partitionist claims and demands.
Partitionists are not committing a crime by advocating partition they are exercising a basic human right (freedom of expression). You might not like it, I might not like it, but they have a right (not a privilege) to express this view. Therefore you are proposing to breach their human rights by either criminalising the expression of their political views or (worse ?) proposing internment to a whole set of people but leaving them without charge or ability to defend themselves or access to due process, thereby breaching their basic rights (to a fair tribunal) yet again. Internment -which you advocated - is a policy which is not interested itself with whether the interned are actually innocent or guilty. It is a fiat against a set of people typically issued by people of fascist mentality, hence I was not surprised to find you advocating this measure however scandalous and brutal it is.
If now you want to change what you wrote and say that you object to the internment proposal that you'd previously advocated I'd be more than happy to see that.