Thursday, April 13, 2006

But What If He Wanted To Bomb A Football Ground ?

Liberals think that firemen, police officers and soldiers are all shambling thugs. True courage is piously repeating Liberal talking points to general acclaim. The latest winner of the Liberal VC (Vacuous Chatter) is Mr Justice Sullivan, who fearlessly used his position on the High Court to denounce government anti-terror measures – just like the last 600 or so judges. Hey, is the chance of a nice obit in the Guardian really that compelling ?

What gave the bewigged one the chance to take the mike at the Liberal’s one note karaoke was government legislation restricting the right of terrorist suspects to travel abroad. If you didn’t know anything about the law, you could almost think the Libs were making a reasonable point, but I don’t think High Court judges really have this excuse. Mr Justice Sullivan must know that the law already allows the government to withdraw passports from suspected (emphatically not just convicted) footie hooligans – his ‘principled stand’ is nothing of the sort.

The Left is fine with seizing the passports of those who might wreck a foreign pub, but not the passports of those who just want to blow one up. I can’t see this line being a big seller with the man on the clapham omnibus, which may be one reason why Liberals and the MSM have completely ignored the football issue, as though seizing passports without convictions was some crazy idea from out of the blue.

You can draw your own conclusions from the fact Liberals find a law perfectly acceptable right up until it affects the ability of Jihadis to go about their business. What’s more intriguing is Sullivan’s attempt to justify this ruling.
[Sullivan] ruled it was "conspicuously unfair" that there was no impartial review of the control orders.
‘Unfair’ ? Is this some kind of new legal term ? Sullivan may as well have ruled that ‘Control Order’ is a really ugly name. Meanwhile, the nation waits with baited breath for Sullivan’s ruling on the fairness of July 7.
Although there was nothing technically wrong with the control order, he said the review process revealed the "thin veneer of legality" of the government's anti-terrorism laws.
Isn’t that just great ? Even Sullivan admits there’s nothing actually wrong with the laws, but he wants to strike them down anyway. Call me old fashioned, but if Sullivan feels so deeply that our current system is so ‘unfair’, he should do the decent thing, and resign to campaign against these laws. Of course, that might force to make actual arguments, and it wouldn’t allow him to be lauded as a hero merely for regurgitating Liberal talking points with a silly wig on. That’s the bottom line. Whether you hate Blair or loathe him, at least he is answerable to the public in at least some respects. The courts ? Forget it – it’s a Liberal Fantasy Island where all the legislation they couldn’t get through Parliament magically becomes a ‘human right’.

No comments: