ARS on Twitter
RSS
Unacceptable behaviours
Posted by Raven on August 25th, 2005
The UN is trying to interfere with Britain’s internal national security. What else would we expect from the UN? Not taking a stand against terrorism…
Charles Clarke reacted angrily today after a senior United Nations official warned that his plans to deport foreign extremists breached international human rights obligations.
The clash came as the Home Secretary announced that deportations of so-called “preachers of hate” from the UK would begin within days under the Government’s new list of “unacceptable behaviours”.
I have a question for the UN::: What about the human right to live? What about the fact that the Islamafreakoids think nothing of innocent people’s human rights? The UN cannot force any nation to keep citizens and non-citizens in their territory because– of the chance of deportation to a nation that MIGHT abuse the terrorist.
Banned behaviours include the expression of views which “foment, justify or glorify” terrorism, or which “foster hatred which might lead to inter-community violence in the UK”.
Mr Clarke said that the measures were necessary to counter the “real and significant” terrorist threat facing the UK after the London suicide bombings on July 7.
But the UN’s special rapporteur on torture, Manfred Nowak, accused the Government of trying to circumvent its duty not to deport people to countries where they could face torture or abuse.
He urged ministers to drop plans to seek memorandums of understanding with a number of North African and Middle East states that individuals returned to those countries would not be tortured. Such diplomatic assurances were not an “appropriate tool” to eradicate the risk of abuse in countries where torture was known to take place, he said.
Screw the torture concerns. Does anyone care about how abusive it might be to die in a subway bombing? I don’t hear any UN peace niks talk about this. They never do.
Today the Home Secretary retorted furiously that the UN was too pre-occupied with the human rights of terrorists when it should be more concerned about their victims.
“The human rights of those people who were blown up on the Tube in London on July 7 are, to be quite frank, more important than the human rights of the people who committed those acts,” he told the ITV News Channel.
“It is a balance, of course, and I acknowledge that there are real issues that have to be addressed, but I wish the UN would look at human rights in the round rather than simply focusing all the time on the terrorist.”
Further clashes are likely, with lawyers warning that the Government will face a protracted legal battle through courts if it tries to deport people to countries where there is considered to be a risk of torture.
No nation should have to go through the UN before it enacts laws designed to protect the people. The UN doesn’t care about the people so much as they care about the poor, misguided terrorists.
The LIST:
The Home Office today published a list of “unacceptable behaviours” which will lead to the deportation or exclusion of any foreign national who commits them from the UK.
According to the Home Secretary the list is indicative rather than exhaustive and covers any non-UK citizen whether in the UK or abroad.
Terrorist violence
Cannot foment, justify, glorify terrorist violence in furtherance of particular beliefs
Terrorist acts
Cannot seek to provoke others to terrorist acts
Criminal acts
Cannot foment other serious criminal activity or seek to provoke others to serious criminal acts
Inter-community violence
Cannot foster hatred which might lead to inter-community violence in the UK.
Method
Individuals who do the above by any means or medium are caught by the legislation, including:
- writing, producing, publishing or distributing material;
- public speaking including preaching
- running a website
- using a position of responsibility such as teacher, community or youth leader
August 25th, 2005 at 11:47 am
Any body that would appoint the likes of Qadhafi and Castro to a commission on human rights needs to be left out in the cold.
These are the kind of folks who live in well guarded mansions or secured, gated communities and get driven everyplace in limos, who are indelibly convinced that their “intellectual superiority” makes them more qualified to enact policy than those actually involved. They would get along well with Bay Area liberals.
My answer to them, if I were a British diplomat, would be, “Listen, you guys can’t even handle your job as it is now, why are you adding on the responsibility of sabotaging our ability to protect our citizens?”
I’d be a lousy diplomat. :)
August 25th, 2005 at 11:52 am
Did you see Austrailia suggested the same thing? Spoons had a link, but I lost it…
August 25th, 2005 at 4:40 pm
Managing Trolls In The Blogosphere
What to do with TROLLS? That is a question plagueing bloggers from day one, handling those people who do not contribute to the conversation, rather hurl invective, make ad hominem attacks, challenge rather than discuss and otherwise make a nuisence of…
August 25th, 2005 at 8:52 pm
Yeah, right. So, what does hizzoner intend to do about it? Whine and go to an all expense paid dinner?
Strap hanger…
August 25th, 2005 at 8:55 pm
Can’t edit these dang things. Hizzoner the strap hanger refers to the U.N. whiner. Of course, if you are a regular reader, you would have taken that for granite.
August 26th, 2005 at 11:50 pm
Let the U.N. just try and enforce its mandates. Last time I checked, the U.S., along with the U.K. and Australia, have been the only people who give the Useless Nitwits any teeth. Ofcourse that is only after 17 or so resolutions. To our British brethren, go ahead and do whatever you want to those terroristic camel-humping pedophile prophet worshipping animals. The jihadi loving U.N. will just talk about it and then have to make a request for some real nations to do anything….:evil: