However, the Conservative Party wants to abolish the Human Rights Act. Our first reaction would be “Why would they want to do that? Now we don’t have anything to protect ourselves when we want to express ourselves.” But the case in point is that plenty of infectious ideas have spread to the point it is fuelling wars elsewhere.

I’m pretty sure you’ve heard of Islamic State. These Jihadists have brought dreadful news. They have even taken to social media and the Internet to spread their activities, namely preaching and ‘acting on’ the Islamic belief the right way, the archaic way. Somehow, these have fed into the minds of the most faithful of Muslims, of which is plentiful in our country.

I have nothing against belief, but preachers and people who spread word of the ideas of violence being a part of religion is counter-productive to the goal of religion, which is to spread peace and harmony between all life.

But the act of balancing the law is difficult in itself. The government has to understand that when they remove the HRA, even common civilians would be involved. The paradox is if they refuse to remove it, then Jihadists have free reign to place their posts online and influence Muslims to feel Islam the right way is to force everyone to believe in it.

It would also seem to perverse our current surveillance and privacy laws because the government must have no control over what is not performed publicly if they undermine the HRA. The Terrorist Act itself could have been useful, if only proper authorities had not abused their positions.

But the inevitable truth is that we need to take one thing for another. Remove HRA, live a little less private and we keep our nation safe. Refuse to remove the HRA and we have all the privacy we could get. These criminals get it too, and we wouldn’t know if our neighbour was planning to blow up something in Manchester that has a lot of people to prove a point.

So, we’re at a Mexican standoff where it’s a lose-lose situation. But I’d choose the lesser evil.

I’d say that we could place some restrictions on The Human Rights Act, namely instigating violence. People must refuse the removal of the HRA but instead persuade the government to add a sub-clause that mentions instigating criminal actions through influence, religion or otherwise, is criminally offensive and is subject to the full force of the law.

In this way, we could single out individuals who use belief, ideals, objectives and political statements to instigate violence against other people.

Isn’t this how Hitler got started with WWII or are we forgetting all about this already?

Recognising the diamonds caused much trouble among groups in Africa, the UN had blocked all sales of diamonds from Africa. Unfortunately, we have the Black Market doing the outsourcing for each and every one of us.

Unsuspecting workers mine blood diamonds. They are uncharted, have no official contracts with their employers and oftentimes left to starve or die underneath the mines. The inhuman situation underneath the mines is a big giveaway. These diamonds are then sold in exchange for powerful arms during the conflict between the political parties involved.

Even the Angolan government knows what’s up and is definitely gaining huge benefits from these diamonds. If it were not, then why imprison Rafael Marques de Morais for criminal defamation when he could have been telling the truth?

The journalist released his book Diamantes de Sangue: Corrupção e Tortura em Angola (Blood Diamonds: Corruption And Torture in Angola) published in 2011. He had written allegations against high ranking Angolan government generals and their collaboration with mining companies to gain profit from blood diamonds in exchange for services involving killing, torture and taking over land unrightfully theirs. These include Angolan diamond fields.

Some of these include General Manuel Helder Vieira Dias Junior Kopelipa, a minister of state who tried to get de Morais to answer to court however dismissed the case.

So why try de Morais when you know that you just need a public statement to show that your record is clean? Why show some Iron fist?

And don’t get me started on what the West has to say to this. The US have lots of stakes in Africa’s hydrocarbons sector, facilitated by the Angolan government. The US have condemned de Morais accusations. Or maybe the US is trying to keep a “heroic face” and show itself as a savior?

The US had announced plans to use their attack and surveillance drones to hunt down, disrupt or fully disarm the operations of blood diamonds in different parts of the world. These include collecting information on mining grounds and potentially disarming, disrupting or completely destroying operations.

Yup, that will save the appearance of the US even though it’s so obvious their interests to exploit Africa’s other resources are pretty much obvious.

You might ask who buys these diamonds? Well, check out your latest jewelry shop in Manchester. You’ve probably seen these shops selling engagement rings to men for women. Marriage rings even. The bigger rock, the more you might know that this was mined by a man who might be dead by now, and their employers at war with each other, and the selling of this diamond had funded a massive bloodbath in Africa because you and your spouse want something special to make yourself feel important against the universe.