[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

You've completely misunderstood me if you think that's the case and I expect an apology from you for essentially suggesting that I'm a terrorist sympathiser.

I value Human Rights, I value the sacrifices made to uphold them. I don't want to see them warped into something that's easily abusable and retractable just so people like you can engage in a bit of wanton bloodlust from the safety of your armchair.

If your approach came to pass, how long would it be before the denial of basic human rights became commonplace for crimes other than Terrorism? Would it go as far as to the point we'd withold rights from suspects too? Do you not see how slippery the slope is? Attitudes like yours piss all over the sacrifices people have made for our rights and I can't stand it. There's nothing I abhor more than people willingly throwing away their rights for no good reason.

All you are suggesting is that we become more like the countries where IS has taken hold. Do you not see that?

I’m not accusing you of being a terrorist sympathiser - I’m just saying that your opinion that the ‘human rights’ of terrorists should be protected is not a logical one in this instance as doing so will likely lead to the deaths of innocent people. One clearly has a significant impact on the other.

I think logic should come into play here - not a blind ideological view that all human rights are equal when the rights of a minority group of evil people could effectively override the safety and human rights of another more worthy group. Commonsense needs to dictate which human rights are more important in a situation like this and priority given to the safety of the majority.

Wanton blood lust indeed - I want to stop the wanton blood lust of the terrorists for Western blood. It’s madness if our country as a whole can’t take such obvious steps to protect the majority from the minority. Human rights laws that allow such a situation stink in my opinion.