Why is it that certain elements of the US population, and now the British, are having such a tizzy over the proported loss of "civil liberties" when as of yet, none has occured? The handwringing and hysterical outbursts from folks such as the ACLU is commonplace, but ignores reality and fact. Searching bags in NYC does not deny anyone their "civil liberties;" just the opposite. It protects the Rights of people to be secure in not being blown up, gassed (remember Japan?) or harmed in other ways by Islamic terrorists. There is nothing unreasonable there. And now we see some of the same handwringing in Britian:
It says something about these anxious times in Britain that both liberals and conservatives are trying to out-tough one another to make it clear that no one here will tolerate terror. But critics and the Muslim community are raising concerns that the balance is being skewed between the rights of individuals and the need to prevent another attack in a country where many concepts of civil rights first took hold.
"I think we are getting into some dangerous territory," said Sonya Sceats, an expert on international human rights law at the Chatham House think tank. "And that we are starting to abrogate some of the principles we use to define ourselves."
Not only is Britain proposing to crack down on radical groups, close certain bookshops and deport hate-mongering clerics to countries that permit torture, Prime Minister Tony Blair signaled he may reconsider aspects of the Human Rights Act, a law some activists here had hoped would become the British equivalent of America’s Bill of Rights.
Any abrogation is caused purely by radical Islamics bent on either converting people to Islam or killing them. You either support their cause, or you are an Infadel, and need to die. That is the choice. It is good to see opposition parties working together to face the challange that Islamic terrorism poses (PS: liberals and conservatives are not defined the same way in Britain that they are in the US: look up the Classical models). Perhaps these people who are concerned about civil liberties should take a hard look at those who are causing the proported changes. Hint: they aren’t Jewish or follow the teachings of Jesus.
(Anthony D.)Romero (exec director of the ACLU) is even more worried because Britain had been counted on to criticize, for example, U.S. detention policies of terrorism suspects at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
"Now you can de-fang one of the closest critics of the Bush administration’s civil liberties policies," he said. "Now you can point to their own policies."
Policies designed to keep Britain and the US safe? Again, perhaps Romero should consider the concerns and safety of his fellow Americans first. He has apparently forgotten the first word in the ACLU’s name.
Britain and America have in the past championed human rights around the world, but could find their standing as watchdogs undermined, he said. "It will certainly undercut the ability of both governments to be advocates for changes on the world scene."
Yes, because those governments like, say, Saddam’s, listened to us so well while standing in their rape and torture rooms. Where was the ACLU while 800,000+ Rwandans were slaughtered? What is the ACLU doing about Sudan? Why does the ACLU stand behind Cuba, when so many people risk death to cross from Cuba to America? It isn’t just for a cheeseburger.
Security experts like Bob Ayers, also of Chatham House, said what Britain really needs to do is enforce laws already on the books that ban inciting hate.
"The right to free speech does not include calling for the death of the infidel," Ayers said. "It doesn’t include calling for the overthrow of the country they live in."
According to the ACLU, people who want to kill us do have those rights, because they are somehow political. Nope, sorry, that is absurd. It is still illegal in every State to threaten people with violence, up to, and including, death. There is no free speech involved in that. And the radical Islamists have made quite clear what their goals are. Death to the Infidel. That violates my Rights.
Read: Wha loss of civil liberties? »
