Terrorism vs. Human Rights
Ken Livingston said of the London bombings “The people of London will
get through this”. This statement, as defiant as it is, isn’t strictly
true. Even if the people of London did not bow down to the terrorists,
surely the government now is. The Prevention of Terrorism bill shows
that the government is clearly willing to give up our freedom of
speech as a result of the 7/7 bombings. This more then anything is
handing victory to the terrorists. The fact that they are proposing to
lock up suspected terrorists without a trial for 3 months is
absolutely outrageous and one can only laugh when people refer to this
country as a “democracy”.
The proposed terrorism bill will undermine the democratic tradition
this country has had for centuries. Surely, in any democracy people
are allowed to express their views, no matter how extreme they may be.
Under the “Prevention of Terrorism Act” extremists will not be the
only ones who will be arrested. You only have to look at the recent
Labour Party conference for an example of how the government is
eroding our rights. “Nonsense” is how Walter Wolfgang described Jack
Straw’s speech at the party conference. Is this really the behaviour
of a potential terrorist? If the new act is introduced this sort of
situation will occur a lot more frequently. People have been wrongly
accused in the past and will continue to do so under this act. There
is a fundamental difference between extremism and terrorism. It is
obvious to any rational person that terrorism is far more dangerous
than extremism. Preventing terrorism is what is needed, but preventing
extremism is merely getting rid of freedom of speech.
I am one of many people who believe that the threat of terrorism has
been blown out of proportion by the government. Yes, I do accept that
we face a threat, but is the threat really that great? The government
does need to take steps to ensure that the British people are safe but
does it really need to go to this extreme?
In the article “Is Terrorism Distinctively Wrong?”, Lionel K. McPherson criticizes the dominant view that terrorism is absolutely and unconditionally wrong. He argues terrorism is not distinctively wrong compared to conventional war. However, I claim that terrorism is necessarily wrong.
The Human Rights Act of 1998 was co-founded upon the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950. Developed following the ending of the Second World War, European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) was constructed to further the idealistic principles and endeavours of equality among all human beings, as well as a devout declaration of preventing the reoccurrence of the holocaust and massacres which have occurred as a casus belli . ECHR comprises civil privileges and liberties fundamental to all human beings irrespective of race, gender, age, sexual orientation exclusive of discrimination. The UK government have promptly endorsed the ECHR, recognising the need of ...
What are terrorist attacks? Terrorist attacks are unexpecting attacks using violence against innocent people. Terrorists Cause harm to others in a cruel manner or kill people in cold blood giving them no mercy or feeling no pity for people who sit hopelessly begging for their lives.Terrorists also destroy many infrastructures or civilian population to prove they are high in political and social strength. Terrorists attack people to attain political or religious aims.
Unfortunately, there isn’t a simple answer. America is united in the cause, but divided over the methods of preventing terrorism. At this time of uncertainty, many are urging Americans to “give up” some of their freedoms and privacy in exchange for safety. Regrettably, this wave of patriotism has spilled over, and is beginning to infringe on our fundamental liberties as outlined in the Bill of Rights. Since the September 11 terrorist attacks, those who have made comments contrary to popular beliefs have prompted much debate about free speech.
Over the past century, terrorism has advanced from random killings to enormous plans for terrorist groups. To understand terrorism, you must first define it. Terrorism as we all know it is hard to define and understand, and has many different definitions as it is used widely. The word "terrorism" stems from the word "terror", which means to instill fear in. People become terrorists when they take the actions towards instilling fear and terror upon people to prove a certain point or agenda.
September 11, 2001 was the date of one of the worst terrorist attacks ever to this day, this event has drastically change how people live everyday life, and also the course of history. In the morning on September 11th three planes were hijacked, with the intended purpose of killing American civilians. Two of these three planes were flown into the towers of the world trade center, while the third was aimed at the pentagon. Because of this for the last decade the United States, among other countries, has fought a war on terror around the world that has resulted in new laws and policies that have drastically taken away the rights of human beings both in foreign countries and domestically.
To sum up, the statistics speak for themselves and the Britain’s fear of becoming an Islamic state is definitely not far-fetched. There is no doubt that the number of the Muslims
The threat of global terrorism continues to rise with the total number of deaths reaching 32,685 in 2015, which is an 80 percent increase from 2014 (Global Index). With this said, terrorism remains a growing, and violent phenomenon that has dominated global debates. However, ‘terrorism’ remains a highly contested term; there is no global agreement on exactly what constitutes a terror act. An even more contested concept is whether to broaden the scope of terrorism to include non-state and state actors.
Jean Paul Sartre’s point regarding how oppression is “so tragic… that it forces the oppressed to adopt methods as brutal as those of their oppressors, in order to win their share of human freedom,” gets to the heart of the terrorism issue. Stern states in Terror in the Name of God, that “suffering can lead to sin.” While Allen in Terrorism in History states that, “the source of evil cannot be intentionality, but helplessness.” Both of these authors seem to come to the same conclusion that by being oppressed, people are more likely to take whatever action they can to get the job done in their desperation. Oppression has even managed to encourage citizens to take up arms to oust a regime or otherwise make changes to a government for hundreds of years. Yehuda uses examples of political assassinations being sometimes the only way for these fighters to “gain power, publicity and attention.”
113-117 Human Rights: Politics and Practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
To prevent tragedies like 9/11 from taking its toll on the United States, terrorism needs to be thought about still to this day. One quote that proves this point is, “ In 2001, the federal commission warned that terrorists could get weapons that can cause mass destruction. Congress needs to work on the integrated governmental structures to better the nation's security” (Augustine). The nation's security can help with the destruction of weapons that are dangerous to the U.S. This can cause more attacks like 9/11 and create a larger threat to the population. Another quote that shows this is, “Preventing further attacks required the U.S. to drop its law-enforcement approach to terrorism and recognize that we were at war” (9/11). To stop attacks like 9/11 from occurring, people need to see that the U.S. isn’t only under attack, but at war as well with the terrorists. Slowly, the country and its citizens are coming realizing this. The counterclaim for this argument is, “The work of public officials allowed us to ask if the country overreacted to 9/11. Providing counter terrorism has increased costs more than what was to be expected” (9/11). The oppone...
...has so much power. The findings of this research could be used by campaigners in an attempt to swing an election in their favour, creating an unfair bias in parliament and denigrating the ideals of democracy.
Research Essay: Can Terrorism Ever Be Justified? “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. “ This is a popular quote regarding the state of terrorism, and how certain people may consider terrorism justifiable. Justifying terrorism is, however, not different from justifying innocent slaughter.
Being safe and free are two natural instincts of animals and human beings. Even though we are born with these innate characteristics there is a huge difference between the development of the two over the course of history.
In 1948 the Universal Declaration of Human rights were devised (UDHR). Everyone has the right to liberty, life, freedom from fear and violence. The obligation to protect individuals and groups the States is required to shield them against human rights abuses (United Nations 2013) The Human Rights Act became effective in the UK in 2000. The purpose of the Human Rights Act is t...