![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Further on down the road...
So, I had a bit of a Conservapedia spiral, and ended up on this entry about the Labour party:
"Possibly due to the war's unpopularity, the Labour party won a much smaller majority in 2005 and has seen key bills defeated by backbench revolts such as the plan to hold terrorist suspects for up to 90 days without charge."
Yep, that decision might have had something to do with an unpopular war, or, possibly, it had something to do with the fact that LOCKING SOMEONE UP FOR THREE MONTHS WITHOUT TELLING THEM WHY IS MORALLY REPUGNANT.
I dunno. Could go either way.
Speaking of detention without charge, once again, WTF is going on at Guantanamo Bay? How, how is this being allowed to continue? It is boggling my mind that the country that claims to be the leader of the free world, the country that is holding itself up as arbiters of democracy and justice across the globe, is detaining people, in some cases FOR YEARS, without charge or any chance of a trial? How? Why are other leaders not doing anything? I mean... I'm speechless. And Tony Blair wanted to go this way - what is he, mental? I hope any attempt by Gordon Brown to extend the time a person can be detained without charge is squashed thoroughly - 28 days is already much longer than most other western countries. A month is a long time to be in prison without knowing why.
ETA: So, according to this article, "But because of a lack of evidence, most of the suspected terrorists taken to the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, will not see the inside of a courtroom." Oh, OK, we're used to this situation. In the legal systems in which most of us inhabit, when you don't have enough evidence to prove a case against someone, they get to go home. Well, that's nice for them. Cup of tea, bit of a sit down, maybe a repeat of Friends, or Afghan equivalent of the sitcom or whatever... but wait, what's this? You don't have any evidence so you're going to detain. Them. Indefinitely. Riiiiiiiiiiiiight. OK.
I'm backing away. Slowly.
Seriously, don't they realise the effect this has on even shallow, materialistic little westerners like me? Y'know, if the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, or any other similar installation furnished in their hearts a burning desire to bomb the fuck out of George W Bush, I would not find it in myself to blame them. America (and by extension Britain and other countries that should be making far more effort than they seem to be to do something about this situation) is putting itself on the moral back foot. DOES THE RULE OF LAW MEAN NOTHING TO THESE PEOPLE?!
"Possibly due to the war's unpopularity, the Labour party won a much smaller majority in 2005 and has seen key bills defeated by backbench revolts such as the plan to hold terrorist suspects for up to 90 days without charge."
Yep, that decision might have had something to do with an unpopular war, or, possibly, it had something to do with the fact that LOCKING SOMEONE UP FOR THREE MONTHS WITHOUT TELLING THEM WHY IS MORALLY REPUGNANT.
I dunno. Could go either way.
Speaking of detention without charge, once again, WTF is going on at Guantanamo Bay? How, how is this being allowed to continue? It is boggling my mind that the country that claims to be the leader of the free world, the country that is holding itself up as arbiters of democracy and justice across the globe, is detaining people, in some cases FOR YEARS, without charge or any chance of a trial? How? Why are other leaders not doing anything? I mean... I'm speechless. And Tony Blair wanted to go this way - what is he, mental? I hope any attempt by Gordon Brown to extend the time a person can be detained without charge is squashed thoroughly - 28 days is already much longer than most other western countries. A month is a long time to be in prison without knowing why.
ETA: So, according to this article, "But because of a lack of evidence, most of the suspected terrorists taken to the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, will not see the inside of a courtroom." Oh, OK, we're used to this situation. In the legal systems in which most of us inhabit, when you don't have enough evidence to prove a case against someone, they get to go home. Well, that's nice for them. Cup of tea, bit of a sit down, maybe a repeat of Friends, or Afghan equivalent of the sitcom or whatever... but wait, what's this? You don't have any evidence so you're going to detain. Them. Indefinitely. Riiiiiiiiiiiiight. OK.
I'm backing away. Slowly.
Seriously, don't they realise the effect this has on even shallow, materialistic little westerners like me? Y'know, if the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, or any other similar installation furnished in their hearts a burning desire to bomb the fuck out of George W Bush, I would not find it in myself to blame them. America (and by extension Britain and other countries that should be making far more effort than they seem to be to do something about this situation) is putting itself on the moral back foot. DOES THE RULE OF LAW MEAN NOTHING TO THESE PEOPLE?!