Support NeoGAF

[Escape Goat]

People are really embracing their inner Mussolini

 

[cpp_is_king]

Neither of these things would have made any impacts on the attacks the UK has faced - none of them.

Prosecuting them in situations where previously they knew about them but did not have enough information to prosecute them would have.

 

[daviyoung]

At this rate every single one of her changes is going to be some knee jerk reaction that she doesn't think through and leads to grave consequences. I mean, who cares about long term? As long as you get the short term confidence and the common man is happy that she's going after the scary brown people, then why care if it causes the UK to regress into a 2nd world country?

basically they have to be seen to be doing something, and there's no easier target than the apathetically placid and passive UK public

 

[DopeyFish]

If anyone can lose their rights and freedoms then ultimately nobody has either.

 

[cromofo]

Viewing extremist content should be viewed in the same light as viewing child porn IMO. But that doesn't require a change in the human rights laws, as we can still lock up paedophiles for viewing child porn now, without any changes needed to the human rights laws. Why not the same for extremism?

Good point.

That's what I want to know, what exactly is her plan.

 

[Boy Wander]

When it comes to human rights, they shouldn't be proposing anything at all. The Human Rights Act should exist above government, not be ripped apart and re-written to a particular government's preference.

It's difficult. I agree that the Human Rights Act should offer people equal protections etc but are there not cases where people don't deserve that level of protection because of their own actions. Isn't it the case that people who deserve to be deported for preaching hate have used the Human Rights Act as a deliberate crutch on which to grab in order to stop them being, rightfully some would say, booted out of the country.

 

[Hasney]

Prosecuting them in situations where previously they knew about them but did not have enough information to prosecute them would have.

Shouldn't they just get more resources to gather information then? If the court was anywhere need competent, they'd be back on the streets anyway if they didn't have the evidence. More people not involved would also be procedures based on hunches with not enough information.

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

Viewing extremist content should be viewed in the same light as viewing child porn IMO. But that doesn't require a change in the human rights laws, as we can still lock up paedophiles for viewing child porn now, without any changes needed to the human rights laws. Why not the same for extremism?

What would you define as extremist content though? Are we going to lock up people who have watched ISIS vids out of morbid curiosity?

 

[jakonovski]

Viewing extremist content should be viewed in the same light as viewing child porn IMO. But that doesn't require a change in the human rights laws, as we can still lock up paedophiles for viewing child porn now, without any changes needed to the human rights laws. Why not the same for extremism?

You'd have to define it in objective and general terms, which would then result in half the tabloids becoming illegal.

 

[Audioboxer]

Viewing extremist content should be viewed in the same light as viewing child porn IMO. But that doesn't require a change in the human rights laws, as we can still lock up paedophiles for viewing child porn now, without any changes needed to the human rights laws. Why not the same for extremism?

We already can bring in and charge people for having/sharing terrorism material/ISIS propaganda. One can only speculate at times gone by it has been down to a lack of resources to go after targets and/or too much leniency in the courts. As I pointed out above we have had scandals in this country where there has been confusion/worry/inaction around going after what are perceived as minority members of the public. That shit has got to stop, but again, I'll reiterate what I said above, that can be sorted without a careless erosion of rights and privacy. There still needs to be lines that aren't crossed so members of the public do not get unfairly abused.

What would you define as extremist content though? Are we going to lock up people who have watched ISIS vids out of morbid curiosity?

On investigation, you would expect qualified and smart minds/intelligence services would investigate the concept of "intent". Background/actions/history/intent and more that develops what the person was/is doing with such materials.

 

[The Hamburglar]

Ok, sure let me try to control myself. What a bitch. What a piece of shit she is to try and even suggest that. This is as bad as Trump trying to get the Muslim ban immediately after the terrorist attack, as while she didn't do this immediately, it's clear that she using this tragic event to push her own shitty agenda. What. A. Cunt.


Except history, but who reads that am I right.



Probably because the U.K. are pretty eager to rewrite the human right laws after they leave the EU. Chances are they don't like the human rights that the EU has.

Oh ok show me the history of the last 50 years of the British losing human rights.

You're right they are eager to rewrite then because some of them are ridiculous like the one I mentioned. The current government has said many times they want to adopt most from the eu and until I see evidence of me actually losing rights as a citizen I won't jump on the evil Tory trying to turn uk into a police state garbage.

 

[Bronx-Man]

Fascism sure is coming back in vogue.

 

[Boy Wander]

Are you going to suggest concentration camps next?

How have we leapt from changing rules to help combat terrorism to fucking concentration camps? I'm sure I'll be accused of "whining", but isn't this a bit of a leap?

 

[31GhostsIV]

Here's May talking about the HRA over a year ago. There's also an amusing video with Patrick Stewart in it. https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ion-on-human-rights-theresa-may-eu-referendum

Tories are so brazen and transparent, it astounds me how much support they have.

 

[HStallion]

Fascism sure is coming back in vogue.

I can't wait till it falls out of fashion and something like Bell Bottom jeans takes over.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Agreed that it should be easier to get rid of clear terror suspects by having them deported instead of continuing to walk free. These people don't deserve second or third changes, get rid of them. They clearly don't want to live in a Western society, so no loss there.

You'd have to define it in objective and general terms, which would then result in half the tabloids becoming illegal.

Tabloids are calling for beheadings and such in the UK these days?

 

[Zakalwe]

I don't particularly like May and I don't mind aspects of Corbyn but watching Diane Abbott on TV fills me with dread. I can't think of anyone more unfit for office and I include Trump.

Boris?

 

[HStallion]

How have we leapt from changing rules to help combat terrorism to fucking concentration camps? I'm sure I'll be accused of "whining", but isn't this a bit of a leap?

Well there are a variety around the world already even in first world countries. Australia has detention centers for refugees which are often cited as gigantic human rights violations and down right terrible.

 

[cloudburst]

what other word would you use to describe someone who is exploiting the fear of many to introduce laws that bring no evidence of their desired effectiveness but will erode the liberties of the entire population?

Theresa May is the absolute worst when she's trying to "tell it like it is". A transparent Gameboy of a politician. She should have got Nigel Farage as her PR person.

I wouldn't use a pejorative word used to denigrate women. I didn't realize that was okay now.

 

[Monty Mole]

What would you define as extremist content though? Are we going to lock up people who have watched ISIS vids out of morbid curiosity?

Well clearly not YouTube videos. We're talking about extreme content (eg training videos) that would need to be sought out from the depths of the internet by those in the know, just as child porn would be by paedophiles.

Edit: Audioboxer explains better above and I agree with his points

 

[jakonovski]

Tabloids are calling for beheadings and such in the UK these days?

I was trying to slam tabloids for being vile and shit, thanks for ruining it.

 

[daviyoung]

I wouldn't use a pejorative word used to denigrate women. I didn't realize that was okay now.

it's a universal swear word

Oh ok show me the history of the last 50 years of the British losing human rights.

well, here you go:

http://www.scriptonitedaily.com/2013/03/19/police-state-uk-the-rights-you-didnt-know-youd-lost/
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...labours-curbs-on-civil-liberties-1627054.html

and two previous "terrorist laws"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-terrorism,_Crime_and_Security_Act_2001
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_Act_2006

 

[Zelias]

This has long been May's goal. She's an authoritarian, she gets off on control, and terrorism provides her with a fig leaf.

 

[Boy Wander]

Boris?

Boris looks like Albert Einstein compared to Abbott.

She was on TV last night being grilled by Sky (yes, I know they're the unofficial Tory channel) about some report she clearly hadn't read and she flat out fucking refused to admit she hadn't read it. She'd rather look a total cunt than admit that she hasn't read the damned thing. I mean, SHE's going to be in charge of our homeland security, her who has been opposing anti-terror legislation for 30 odd years in addition to being totally fucking clueless.

Watch this and tell me you want this idiot running the Home Office:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQ2l8Cs-Lc4

 

[excelsiorlef]

it's a universal swear word



well, here you go:

http://www.scriptonitedaily.com/2013/03/19/police-state-uk-the-rights-you-didnt-know-youd-lost/
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...labours-curbs-on-civil-liberties-1627054.html

and two previous "terrorist laws"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-terrorism,_Crime_and_Security_Act_2001
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_Act_2006

Eh universal no.

British arguably.

 

[Raylan Targaryen]

english speaking countries were a mistake it seems

 

[daviyoung]

Eh universal no.

British arguably.

and Australian

 

[cloudburst]

Eh universal no.

British arguably.

this.

 

[daviyoung]

this.

so don't use it then? but as a British, I don't care who uses it or who it's used against

 

[Pagusas]

Don't you think she looks tired?

 

[Boy Wander]

Well there are a variety around the world already even in first world countries. Australia has detention centers for refugees which are often cited as gigantic human rights violations and down right terrible.

Last I heard, Australia wasn't barcoding and gassing people. Unless my understanding of concentration camps is incorrect.

 

[Kanhir]

english speaking countries were a mistake it seems

Hey, Ireland is still cool. We're a corporate tax haven, sure, but we vaguely care about human rights!

Don't you think she looks tired?

 

[cloudburst]

so don't use it then? but as a British, I don't care who uses it

I won't, and don't fool yourself––the word is used to disparage women. British or otherwise .

 

[HStallion]

Last I heard, Australia wasn't barcoding and gassing people. Unless my understanding of concentration camps is incorrect.

Nope just lots of rape, starvation, inhumane conditions and so on. My point is that these kinds of places aren't so out of bounds by current standards, even in the Western world, that they should be viewed as improbably or even unlikely.

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

Thanks for the replies, good answers.

 

[eizarus]

I wouldn't use a pejorative word used to denigrate women. I didn't realize that was okay now.

For what it's worth, cunt isn't considered as severe as it is in the US

 

[DeathyBoy]

Doesn't she look tired

 

[daviyoung]

I won't, and don't fool yourself––the word is used to disparage women. British or not.

oh dear, PM me if you really have a problem with this

 

[excelsiorlef]

Last I heard, Australia wasn't barcoding and gassing people. Unless my understanding of concentration camps is incorrect.

Internment camps then.

 

[faridmon]

Did you read the OP?

Did you live in real life?

This won't help curb extremism, will negatively affect other humans rights such a LBGT as a consequence too, and will just give racists just enough ammunition just to deport anyone with no reason. Keep in mind those terrorist are homegrown and the poor and vulnerable immigrants who escaped hell will just be deported for nothing.

 

[Escape Goat]

Doesn't she look tired

She lacks STAH-MIN-AH.

 

[Zakalwe]

What types of human rights are we talking about here? To me, the things she said in that video make sense. Clearly, something is wrong when I can watch a film called Jihadis Next Door and then have that same jihadi kill people afterwards.

Let's assess the situation before wetting the bed and declaring her an evil cunt.

May cut MI5 and Police.

At the time she was told by both "This will leave us exposed. Vulnerable to attack. Very real chance of requiring militarisation of police force in near future".

May called it scare mongering.

3 attacks this year she is directly responsible for. We militarised police. Only reason London became as secure as it is was because she skimmed officers and resources from neighbouring areas leaving them exposed. She spoke about putting extra bodies on the street, they were not extra, they were taken from places they were needed. The reason you can view those films is because those in a position to do something had their support cut to the point they could not.

Now these things are coming to light and her once huge majority is down to a fraction, and she's calling for this human rights change not because it's what we need to fight terrorism effectively, but because it could score her last minute votes to increase her win to a majority again.

She /is/ an evil cunt.

Viewing extremist content should be viewed in the same light as viewing child porn IMO. But that doesn't require a change in the human rights laws, as we can still lock up paedophiles for viewing child porn now, without any changes needed to the human rights laws. Why not the same for extremism?

Viewing extremist material can have benefit when trying to understand how to educate against it and counter it with educated responses.

Viewing child porn has no value.

Don't be absurd.

Boris looks like Albert Einstein compared to Abbott.

She was on TV last night being grilled by Sky (yes, I know they're the unofficial Tory channel) about some report she clearly hadn't read and she flat out fucking refused to admit she hadn't read it. She'd rather look a total cunt than admit that she hasn't read the damned thing. I mean, SHE's going to be in charge of our homeland security, her who has been opposing anti-terror legislation for 30 odd years in addition to being totally fucking clueless.

Watch this and tell me you want this idiot running the Home Office:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQ2l8Cs-Lc4

She is nothing, nothing compared to May and Boris and their ilk. Yes, she may not be ideal, but its not even in the same league as the shit the Tory's have been pulling.

If you like you can list every thing wrong you can think of about Abbot, I'll retort with May and Boris. Each point raised requires citation to back it up.

Go whenever your'e ready.

 

[Daedardus]

I mean, terrorist laws are all great and that until a crazy regime takes over the power in xx years and you become critical of the government and now you are the terrorist.

The nothing to hide argument doesn't hold too, since nothing to hide depends on the regime in power. Jews had nothing to hide during WW2.

 

[Audioboxer]

Well clearly not YouTube videos. We're talking about extreme content (eg training videos) that would need to be sought out from the depths of the internet by those in the know, just as child porn would be by paedophiles.

Edit: Audioboxer explains better above and I agree with his points

Some of the Islamists have actually used (and still do) YouTube and Twitter. I wouldn't say any social media content could be ruled out, but used altogether for whatever case may be built. It shouldn't just have to be live leak beheading videos and the dark web content that can be used against you.

YT and Twitter (Facebook too) as American based companies/owners have their on-going tussles with freedom of speech. They are private entities, however, so there are times they need to do a much better job of dealing with what is some seriously downright radical content at times. I'm not just talking about Facebook live streams not getting pulled for an hour, but groups and radical posters left unchallenged for months. This is on them to change as private companies (cleaning up their own messes), that is not something our Government can do. All our Government can do is potentially use the content in a case against you if you end up being part of radical circles on social media.

 

[TeamLeftMatch]

Oh ok show me the history of the last 50 years of the British losing human rights.

You're right they are eager to rewrite then because some of them are ridiculous like the one I mentioned. The current government has said many times they want to adopt most from the eu and until I see evidence of me actually losing rights as a citizen I won't jump on the evil Tory trying to turn uk into a police state garbage.

Not British but the Patriot Act is a good example of people loosing their rights for security having the excuse of "You've got nothing to hide". Privacy was lost in an attempt to stop terrorism.

Edit: Still not British but the Camp's the Japanese Americans were forced into is a pretty good example of stripping human rights for security, despite the fact that these were innocent people.


Curious what of the EU human rights should be removed once the UK leaves the EU. Don't say the one that stops us from preventing terrorism, if you don't know the EU human right laws then why are you ok with it changing.

 

[Dishwalla]

Still haven't figured out why the US and the UK have been trying to out-awful each other this last year or so. Is there some sort of contest going on that I wasn't aware of?

 

[Slightly Live]

We can always fall back on the European Court of.... oh shit.

 

[Boy Wander]

Nope just lots of rape, starvation, inhumane conditions and so on. My point is that these kinds of places aren't so out of bounds by current standards, even in the Western world, that they should be viewed as improbably or even unlikely.

Source? I know that a few (not sure how many tbh) were on hunger strike. Didn't realise that rape etc was going on.

 

[daviyoung]

Still haven't figured out why the US and the UK have been trying to out-awful each other this last year or so. Is there some sort of contest going on that I wasn't aware of?

we're both imperialistic war-hungry nations

without a decent enemy to steamroll we just turn on ourselves

 

[Psychotext]