Human Rights and National Suicide Pacts
Abu Qatada, a charming Palestinian who is known as Osama bin Laden’s “ambassador to Europe,” has associated with Abu Musab al-Zarqawi (from Iraq), Zacarias Moussaoui (of 9/11 fame), and Richard Reid (shoe bomber). Though Abu Qatada arrived in the United Kingdom on a forged passport, he was permitted to settle as a political refugee. For about the past ten years, the United Kingdom has sought without success to remove him as the courts block every attempt in the name of human rights.
There is no need to discuss this case in any detail as you can read any number of similar cases in the British courts in which individuals enter the country on false papers, claim asylum, never work, and live off state benefits. Either they become directly involved in terrorist activities soon after their arrival, or do so after a life of crime and conversion to Islam in prison.
How is it possible that a country as important as Britain with its fine traditions of values, ethics, and common sense can have reached a situation that it cannot control its borders, nor remove those who openly wish to kill its citizens (and be foolish enough to pay for it)? The answer is the Human Rights Act.
Though space does not permit a full discussion, the scale of the problem must be described. Recently, some of those who aided the 7/21 bombers (the second wave of attempted bombings of London transportation after 7/7) were released. After numerous legal battles, at vast expense to the British taxpayer (legal aid was granted), the courts held that deportation to Eritrea for one individual would breach human rights. Therefore, the individual is free to live in London (on welfare) and must be monitored 24/7 by the security forces (I forgot to add — at great expense).
So a foreign national, who has participated in violent jihad with the aim of slaughtering as many British citizens as possible, cannot be removed — not even for the sake of the safety of the population.
Recently, several members of a terrorist cell were arrested in Manchester. Bizarrely, two of the terrorists argued that it would breach their human rights to be returned to Pakistan, while two others did not raise this argument and were returned. There are hundreds of cases pending before the European Court arguing that the return of petty criminals to Islamic states could violate the criminals’ human rights since Islamic states impose Islamic punishments.
Our authorities are unable to try terrorist suspects in many cases, because our courts have ruled that a fair trial requires cross examination of witnesses and therefore MI5 must expose its informers. This, of course, is likely to result in the informers’ death (unless a new identity and country is given) and is a somewhat limiting factor in securing new recruits. All in the name of human rights.
There is nothing to worry about. To prove this, the archbishop of Canterbury and the lord chief justice have called for the introduction of Sharia law in the United Kingdom, lamenting how woefully misunderstood it is.
The whole Human Rights is another way to subvert the debate on individual rights vs collective rights.
The two are NOT compatible, human rights vs individual rights. The collectivists again attempt to subvert the narrative by their crappy use of neo lingistics.
The Golden rule does not give the group the right to take from the group to give to the individual.
The Brits and any country that allows the flagrant infiltration of their country of those that do not believe in western thought, or a better descriptor Christian ideals, deserve everything they get. I do not feel bad for them at all. As for the component of not being able to face your accuser, what the heck are you thinking?
What the heck is this, a little whining about dhimmitude? If you are so worried about them getting killed, how bout giving them the right to defend themselves. Oh wait, cannot have that, then there would be no need for some huge government bureacracies.
Or as Buzzsawmonkey has pointed out many times, “human rights” are NOT civil rights. “Human rights” are a Trojan horse for the destruction of civil rights.
To clarify, I was not referring to the author in my previous comment.
What a sad and sick development. The police go after a football player who may or may not have uttered a racial slur but calling for killing people is okay as long as you’re not white. Every moron in the Third World knows how to exploit this political correctness and they are nothing more than con artists except real con artists work. The UK needs its own “Christian Spring.”
So a foreign national … cannot be removed — not even for the sake of the safety of the population.”
We need to send the NTSA to study the British Highway System. Imagine how many lives could be saved here if we also could eliminate all fatal traffic accidents. No cases of “bad clams”? No tragic stumbles into a busy motorway? No accidental drownings? No random muggings? Really?
I predict that in 10 years everyone in the UK will be wearing helmets and of course mandatory sunscreen.
I predict that in 10 years everyone in the U.K. will be wearing either turbans or burkas.
I hate to say it, but the Brits NEED an Oliver Cromwell who will reset the idiotic laws, and clean out the refuse with fire and slaughter.
Of course, we’re in need of one of those, too.
Yes, because the best way to establish moral superiority to murderous religious dictatorships is with your own murderous religious dictatorship.
“Human rights” legislation of any kind should be deeply suspect. Human rights do not depend on the abrogation of national rights.
The nations of Europe were safe when national identity was commensurate with an ethnic identity.
Now that ethnic identities have been alienated, there will be chaos without end.
Quote:
There is nothing to worry about. To prove this, the archbishop of Canterbury and the lord chief justice have called for the introduction of Sharia law in the United Kingdom, lamenting how woefully misunderstood it is.
end
Honor killing in Britain– nothing to worry about?
Desecration of the national history– nothing to worry about?
Rape and assault on British and English indigenes– nothing to worry about?
Sharia is a parallel system– it will supercede English courts– it is only a matter of time.
And no one is worried?
Wow.
And someone said that the British system of education is superior to ours???
It seems to me that the British have just undergone a massive case of amnesia.
And with amnesia, you lose more than memory, you lose the entire world!
Britain needs to restore the Monarchy and have some good old-fashioned treason trials, followed by some good old-fashioned executions.
It seems to me that the house of Britain has become so infested with roaches that the only way to get rid of them is to burn the house down.
Toynbee’s dictum that civilizations die from suicide is relevant here.
They will go with a false sense of moral superiority, like that woman on the Titanic who went down with all her diamonds.
In the History of Civilizations, Toynbee only recognized one (the Aztecs or Incas, I forget) out of about seventeen which died (in this case exterminated) primarily due to outside forces. The rest, reckoned Toynbee, as Larry Allen wrote, rotted from within and allowing their external enemies to destroy them.
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/9506701.Foreign_mums_are_leading_baby_boom/
26 percent of babies in the UK are born to foreign parents. Throw in grandparents, and you realize most of the “British” probably arrived after 1945. It’s no longer the same race as Churchill, Henry VIII, and Shakespeare. It’s mixed and degenerate now.