British Law Lords say human rights apply to Iraqi civilian deaths

BogwartJun 13th, 2007 - 13:13:49

I deeply resent the comment that 'The British could never build the equivalent of Guantanamo'. Has there ever been a suggestion that we would want to?

The people illegally held captive at Gitmo are in a legal black hole which could never be tolerated under British law, and to suggest otherwise is disingenuous and reprehensible.

Report this comment

kk956Jun 13th, 2007 - 21:00:27

bogwart, I wish I had your faith. A few years ago I'd have thought that a lot of the Terrorism Act 2006 was impossible. And here, unlike in the US, there isn't even a judiciary that can invalidate an act of parliament. I put nothing past the major parties right now --- in terms of capability *or* intent.

Report this comment

PGTipsJun 14th, 2007 - 06:49:37

Human rights people make me sick. They're quick to hound the British and US troops about torture, yet they are completely silent when British and US troops are tortured by insurgents.

Where is the HR lobby's response to the Al-Qaeda torture manual that was published a month ago? If we describe what the US and British troops do as torture, what can we call this? www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,275340,00.html

Another good response to this whole human rights nonsense can be found at www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/06/14/nrights214.xml. This is written by a serving Royal Military Police officer, who has way more 'on the ground' experience than the buffoons in the House of Lords or the HR lobby.

Do I advocate torture? Hell no. Do I advocate tying the hands of our troops and preventing them from doing their jobs? Hell no. Forcing the UK troops to adhere to these 'human rights laws' while their enemy is not bound by such constraints is merely signing the death warrants of our troops.

Report this comment