Slashdot Mirror
Theresa May Says UK Will 'Tear Up' Human Rights Laws If Needed For Terror Fight (bbc.com)
Hours ahead of the UK general election, the prime minister and Conservative party leader Theresa May proposed to "tear up" human rights law which, she asserts, stops her government dealing effectively with terrorism. From a report: She said she wants to do more to restrict the freedom of those posing a threat and to deport foreign suspects. The UK could seek opt-outs from the European Convention on Human Rights, which it has abided by since 1953. Labour said the UK would not defeat terrorism "by ripping up basic rights." The Lib Dems said it was a "cynical" move ahead of Thursday's election. The Conservatives have faced criticism over police cuts and questions about intelligence failures following the terror attacks in London and Manchester. Her remarks come days after she expressed desires to assume more controls and regulation on the ways the internet works.
Meanwhile, she couldn't be bothered to fund actual police and security services that could have potentially stopped the attackers in the first place, with information and methods they already had available to them.
The fact that she, as Home Secretary, gutted those services should be enough to tell you that she doesn't actually care about the problem, she's just using it as an excuse.
You are being manipulated to give up your essential freedoms. Statistically, terrorism is a tiny concern compared to the danger you submit yourself to daily.
During and immediately after September 11, 2001. But is it really so easy to say such things that are antithetical to the free world? I get that it's hard to have to follow rules, but remember that when you're the one with black hood pulled over your head even though you know you didn't do anything wrong, it's you who asked for this Theresa May.
It became necessary to destroy the town in order to save it
What a rotten party, have we run out of beer or something?
The way "tear up" is used the summary, it is conveyed that May is saying that she will "tear up" human rights law in the linked article. She didn't say that. The Labor Party as has said, per the article, "by ripping up basic rights".
May actually tweeted, "I'm clear: if human rights laws get in the way of tackling extremism and terrorism, we will change those laws to keep British people safe." (https://twitter.com/theresa_may/status/872181737933217794?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedailybeast.com%2Ftheresa-may-if-human-rights-laws-get-in-our-way-we-will-change-them)
There's no need to compromise your integrity to sully May. She's doing well enough on her own.
Not "Tear up", per se, but here's a quote from her in the article:
"And if our human rights laws get in the way of doing it, we will change the law so we can do it."
Yeah, that doesn't sound fucked up at all.
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
We're going to fight the terrorist agenda of disrupting our way of life in order to make their voices heard, by disrupting our way of life thus making their voices heard.
Can't imagine why people continue to use terrorist tactics. /s
I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
Patrick Stewart sketch: what has the ECHR ever done for us?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Speaking after Saturday's London attack, Mrs May said "enough is enough" and that "things need to change" in the terror fight.
The death and injury of people is tragic but destroying the rights of your own people is just idiotic. Terrorists aren't killing millions, they killed maybe 100 in the last decade. More people die from drowning than terrorist attacks!
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!
Theresa may think that the only way to fighting radical Islam is to build a totalitarian regime, I hope voters disagree. Personally, I would rather government protect my rights than keep me safe.
Just compare this to what Winston Churchill famously said in 1942: "The power of the Executive to cast a man in prison without formulating any charge known to the law, and particularly to deny him the judgment of his peers is in the highest degree odious and is the foundation of all totalitarian government, whether Nazi or Communist." And the UK was in thousand-fold greater danger then than it is now.
Why everyone appears to be so thin-skinned these days? And why the first objective of modern-day rulers is to dispense with the rule of law and civil liberties, even when they have vast resources at their disposal?
I'm afraid that in the future, people will indeed say WWII era was the UK's "finest hour", but it will be for reasons Churchill had not envisioned.
Roper: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law!
More: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
Roper: I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you — where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast — man's laws, not God's — and if you cut them down — and you're just the man to do it — d'you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake.
Here's some facts to consider:
Given these figures, it would make more sense to take away their right to drink and/or drive.
Or, at least, get rid of the bees and wasps...