only the insane have strength enough to prosper. only the prosperous truly judge what is sane.


Father Blair says: "Demons, out!!!"

So, Blair is toughening up antiterror laws to make it easier to deport those who incite terror. Predictably, Liberty is outraged at these tougher measures:
...civil rights group Liberty said his plans attacked key human rights and would jeopardise national unity.

Director Shami Chakrabarti said: "It seems he no longer has much truck for fundamental human rights at all.

"He's talking quite actively about deporting people to face torture around the world - that is completely unacceptable and plays into the hands of terrorists."
OH, now I understand! Let me get this straight. Basically, the UK should allow extremists to freely teach their agenda of death and hate--to actively encourage wanna-bombers like the amateurs who attempted to sow terror on 7/21--because these individuals might face torture back home. Doing so "plays into the hands of terrorists"? Yes, of course, it's all clear now. By sending death-cult imams back home, we strengthen terrorists--why? Well, it should be obvious! We're violating the sacred tenets of multiculturism by not allowing angry imams to freely practice their faith (in blowing up innocents on the Tube)! How dare we deport those who actively call for the destruction of our country, our values, our way of life?!? Such arrogance! We should embrace these enemies among us, tolerate and respect them. Never mind that they don't return the favor. To show anything but tolerance for intolerance would be playing into the hands of terrorists.

If we send them home, they may also face torture. Better that they remain safe and warm in their cozy Londonistan flat, where they can freely advocate their views on how to build a better nail bomb, how to and how to thrill Syrian TV audiences ("Let me show you this quick videotape of one of my dearest friends, Mullah Galloway...").

If only Galloway held a Syrian passport...

UPDATE: Nosemonkey has extensive thoughts on the subject that are well worth reading.


Anonymous Mike Cunningham said...

It all depends on who is being deported! As I posted just this morning, not much has been said in the past few weeks about this little bunch, and they weren't even terrorists!

8/05/2005 08:25:00 AM

Blogger Eric S said...

Ugh...well, that's a bit of a different issue, but certainly worthy of attention. I never even knew that there were indigenous people on Diego Garcia...evidently it's not something they like to talk about very much. Seeing as how most of the island has been paved into a military facilities, one wonders what the original residents would have to come back to should they ever get the chance. Depressing.

Back to the proposed antiterror laws, though...the policy needs to be strong enough to be effective, though. I've seen arguments that the free speech of radicals should be tolerated as long as it doesn't lead to violence. That sounds logical on the surface...but it's also very dangerous. Incitement can plant seeds that take a very long time to grow. It's not as simple as "Impressionable young man hears radical speech today, plants bombs in the Underground tomorrow" might take years to 'prepare' the potential bomber.

Obviously, the law needs to explicitly define what constitutes grounds for deportation. Criticism of British policy certainly should not qualify. I have yet to see the specific criteria they will use, but that's really the key. If the language is deliberately left vague, then I'd be much less supportive...

8/05/2005 08:59:00 AM


Post a Comment

<< Home