UK Government using Woolwich murder to push through Data Communications Bill
40 replies, posted
[QUOTE=007JamesBond007;40800167]Yeah but the Conservatives say they would scrap that.[/QUOTE]
Haha
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Council_of_Europe_%28blue%29.svg[/url]
Have fun being the only Western country not protecting its citizens, then.
The thing to do is write to your MP and spread awareness to make sure this thing gets dropped like last time
[QUOTE=MrEndangered;40800672]Yeah, like I'd trust this government to ensure my rights when they're perfectly willing to remove the current law under every exception they get. Sounds legit![/quote]
Do you really think that the country would peacefully accept any reduction in human rights?
[quote]It's too small of a majority to affect a Con/Lab coalition vote.[/QUOTE]
But it wouldn't go to a vote, the Lib Dems would block it as a member of the coalition
[QUOTE=butt2089;40802887]Do you really think that the country would peacefully accept any reduction in human rights? [/QUOTE]
Do people know what their full human rights are? I certainly don't. Besides, they already want to remove one of them - the right to deport somebody even if they have evidence used against you through torture. The government already seems that's OK if it's convenient. That's a pretty big no no for me.
[QUOTE=MrEndangered;40803978]Do people know what their full human rights are? I certainly don't. Besides, they already want to remove one of them - the right to deport somebody even if they have evidence used against you through torture. The government already seems that's OK if it's convenient. That's a pretty big no no for me.[/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure deporting people who radicalise young people into attacking our soldiers on home soil isn't a bad thing.
[QUOTE=Ereunity;40804209]I'm pretty sure deporting people who radicalise young people into attacking our soldiers on home soil isn't a bad thing.[/QUOTE]
Then you're missing the point of Human Rights. Considering he has not been charged in this country, he's being sent to a place that allows torture and used it pro actively. You can't say 'Oh you can't do that because of his human rights', and then say 'well maybe THAT unalienable human right can be wavered just this one time because it suits us right now'. So, what happens if a British citizen abroad is tortured in a country that allows it? Will we accept it? They're not answering that question. Because surely that means we'll allow our own citizens to be tortured if the situation allows it.
If there is a standard of human rights, we can't go back on them when we choose to. That's a mockery of justice and a dangerous precedent.
[QUOTE=MrEndangered;40804634]Then you're missing the point of Human Rights. Considering he has not been charged in this country, he's being sent to a place that allows torture and used it pro actively. You can't say 'Oh you can't do that because of his human rights', and then say 'well maybe THAT unalienable human right can be wavered just this one time because it suits us right now'. So, what happens if a British citizen abroad is tortured in a country that allows it? Will we accept it? They're not answering that question. Because surely that means we'll allow our own citizens to be tortured if the situation allows it.
If there is a standard of human rights, we can't go back on them when we choose to. That's a mockery of justice and a dangerous precedent.[/QUOTE]
There is the right to have a fair trial and the right to a family life, both of which Abu Qatada has used to remain in the UK. There are also Human Rights stating that everyone has the right to feel safe and secure in their home country - a man like Abu Qatada is someone who infringes on these rights for millions of people in the UK.
How would you choose who wins and who loses when Human Rights overlap?
[QUOTE=butt2089;40804742]There is the right to have a fair trial and the right to a family life, both of which Abu Qatada has used to remain in the UK. There are also Human Rights stating that everyone has the right to feel safe and secure in their home country - a man like Abu Qatada is someone who infringes on these rights for millions of people in the UK.
How would you choose who wins and who loses when Human Rights overlap?[/QUOTE]
Try him and imprison him in the UK then
[QUOTE=smurfy;40805144]Try him and imprison him in the UK then[/QUOTE]
Except he doesn't break any major laws so we can't arrest him, and the last time we did arrest him for minor things he lawyered up and got out of it. And we can't recharge him for those offences because that would be double jeopardy.
He's fiddling our entire system and there is fuck all we can do about it. That's why the gov wants to scrap the old human rights bill and make a new one so they can do something about him.
[QUOTE=blehblehbleh;40794188]Fuck that shit. I hate to say it, but if this bill passes we'll be one step closer to George Orwell being correct. [/QUOTE]
No.
If you'd ever actually read and understood 1984 you'd understand that constant surveillance isn't what causes its horror and decay, it's the sociological and revisionary aspects.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.