There was always a degree of certainty about amending that most hated of laws – the Human Rights Act; it was always just a question of what angle would be used to justify it. It looks like we have an answer. The thing that immediately struck me about these ‘terror suspects’ was that, well, they don’t want to kill anyone in Britain. They apparently don’t want to blow up any nightclubs here, they just want to fight the forces of those that illegally started a war in a foreign land. In any other circumstance they’d be labelled ‘freedom fighters’ Obviously since they wish to fight against us in our illegal war, they’re hateful terrorists bent on a path of ill-thought destruction.
There is such a chasm between me and anyone who wants to repeal a law that protects them from the state, then I’m not quite sure what to say other than you are a cuckold. If you honestly think laws designed around human rights are an inherently bad thing so be it.
But let’s stop any pretense of fighting for the greater good in far off lands. To paraphrase what I’ve said in other threads: the way those of us in this ‘War on Terror’ are behaving towards anyone that dissents is as bad as the “evil states” we fight. We and the Americans may not abuse the liberty of as many people as Iran but we cannot deny the abuse itself. The Great British Public may as well torch the parliment and let the government issue a fire decree. I hope anyone who agrees with concepts like ‘house arrest’ have the intellectual honesty not to criticise the detainment of Aung San Suu Kyi.
|Post to del.icio.us|
Filed in: Civil liberties,Current affairs