'There is no danger that justifies any limitation of freedom,' writes judge, rejects police request for restraining order against Ezra Nawi and Guy Butavia.00:11 12.02.16 | 0 comments
I do believe in civil liberties- but I also believe that they are not an absolute value and they must give way, in appropriate circumstances, and with appropriate limits, to measures aimed at ensuring the safety of the population. My point is that the British have been so concerned with preserving the civil liberties of those in their midst who hate them, that they allow such people to infect elements of the population with their vituperative hatred and their murderous intentions, thus threatening the security of many other people. You obviously have a low tolerance for security measures- "Give me risk, even a high degree, and I`ll take it over curbs on freedom anyday". However, you are not the sole arbiter of acceptable risk. I am prepared to draw the line at people who call for mass murder of innocents and then hide behind their civil liberties to escape sanction. I am not as worried as you about the precedent this sets. Britain, like Canada, is a country where the rule of law is supreme. If, as you say, the current terrorist mania will pass, then the courts and Parliament will ensure that the balance between freedom and security moves appropriately back in the other direction.