Human rights activists!!

[BANGKOK RED]

Don't they just get on your tit's!!!! I mean, I know that often what they do is right, but we all know that some English twat somewhere is going on about how the bomber who was killed yesterday deserved a fair trial blah blah blah.              

As far as I am concerned these terrorists should have their live's spared only to give them a miserable existence for the rest of their pathetic lives.

I know that these human right activists may not have been made public this time (Yet) but even thinking about it pisses me off.
 
Sorry, just had ta get that off my chest.

[Spud]

The Human rights law is a fucking joke!, the sooner we get out of the EU the better.

[CARTMAN]

if it hadn't been for the london underground bombings then the human rights activists would be out telling everyone that what happened was wrong and his human rights were violated. but after what happened two weeks ago they realise that siding with the terrorists isn't a good idea

[pauld]

So BR have you changed your mind in light of the fact that the "bomber killed yesterday" has turned out to be instead "a completely innocent Brazilian tourist executed on the back of mistaken intelligence"? That's why we need human rights activists as a check on otherwise uncontrolled police powers to do what they want. And no I'm not criticising the individual officers involved - they were acting on the basis of the information they had and took what action they deemed necessary to prevent what I assume they genuinely believed was a suicide bomber from setting off another murderous bomb on the tube. But the police need to take a serious look at how they handle such dubious "intelligence" if it's going to end up with innocent people being gunned down in the street (or on the Tube in this case).

Incidentally, the director of Liberty (the main pressure group for human rights activists in the UK and herself a human rights lawyer) has spoken out in favour of the police tactic of shooting to kill in the case of suspected suicide bombers (because it's the only sure way of stopping the scum). So your prediction that human rights activists would condemn the killing on principle turns out to be based solely in your prejudices about what you assume about human rights groups rather than any real fact. Human rights activists are just as opposed to terrorists as you are, you know - terrorism is the ultimate denial of human rights.

On a broader note, Spuddy, the scum who have perpetrated the outrages of recent weeks would love nothing better than to see your call for human rights law to be disregarded - it's one of the things that sets us apart as a civilised society from the kind of savages who view human life as so expendable as to justify them killing innocents to make a point. We are better than them - don't let's abandon everything that makes us better by buckling at the first point of pressure.

[Spud]

But people like Bakri Mohammed who should be deported are allowed to carry on claiming benefits whilst spouting religious hatred thanks to the human rights law. :-))(

[CARTMAN]

its not the human rights laws in general that most people have a problem with, its the freeloaders and religous fanatics that have been hiding behind it and milking the tax payers money for years (abu hamza for one)

i agree that to disregard these laws would be wrong but we do need to have tighter controls on those that abuse these laws and take good honest citizens for mugs by finding loopholes in the system

[pauld]

But people like Bakri Mohammed who should be deported are allowed to carry on claiming benefits whilst spouting religious hatred thanks to the human rights law. :-))(

Sorry, Spuddy, but that's just wrong. The reason people like (e.g.) Hamza have got away with their vile rantings for so long is not because of human rights legislation but because the prosecuting authorities have jibbed it. The Human Rights Act only features in this as a convenient scapegoat for politicians looking for an excuse for their own failings and lazy right-wing journos looking for an easy hit to fill some column inches. Don't fall for their crap excuses - there certainly are failings in the way we have dealt with extremists (and not just Islamic fundamentalists - London has also been a safe haven for (e.g.) Italian neo-Nazi terrorists - basically if they don't immediately threaten us our security services seem to take the view that we'll let them in so at least we can keep an eye on them) but the HRA is not a key component in this so much as policy on implementing laws. In other words, its not the laws that are the problem - it's the failure to implement them.

[flammableBen]

Who was it who said something along the lines of "I'd fight to the end against what your saying but I'd fight to the death for your right to say it" - something along those lines anyway

I think kicking people out who preach terrorist style stuff is only a very short term  solution, they will only be replaced by other people preaching the same stuff. The best solution is to sort out our own foreign policy and use any diplomatic power we have to influence america to do the same. Britain is no longer a super power and will never be again, surely the best thing we could do is go down in history as the diplomatic power who influenced america enough to sort out a lot of the middle easy problems, mainly the israel palistine thing. ('thing' of course is  a  bit of a simplificaiton)

but anyhoo I apolise for any mispellings, I have been drinking. I think I miight have just completely agreed with pauld