Viking Warrior Posted 12 November, 2012 Share Posted 12 November, 2012 What is up with our legal profession . The police arrest someone for a photo that was posted on a social media site showing a burnt poppy . Now this guy is about to be released because his human rights will be infringed if he is sent back to Jordan . Do these law people not realise he killed innocent people . He has lost his rights for the murders he has committed . Now it will cost the tax payer millions to keep him here . I hope he commits another crime of here killing people . Then these Mamby pamby lawyers might wake up to real world on the stupidity of their judgement . I hope he doesn't commit murder but if its the only way to make the judges/ lawyers to wake up then so be it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 November, 2012 Share Posted 12 November, 2012 wait for the get along gang to tell us to live and let live Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint in Paradise Posted 12 November, 2012 Share Posted 12 November, 2012 I am getting to the stage of wondering how much longer deportation or imprisonment for any crime will be allowed as it obviously harms "human rights" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 12 November, 2012 Share Posted 12 November, 2012 Just put him on the next RAF aircraft to Akrotiri, let the Jordanians pick him up there. The French do it regularly, we should just do the same. Might make a few more run for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stain Posted 12 November, 2012 Share Posted 12 November, 2012 I hope he commits another crime of here killing people . Have I read this right? Are you saying you want him to kill people to teach the authorities a lesson? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 12 November, 2012 Share Posted 12 November, 2012 wait for the get along gang to tell us to live and let live I celebrated the news as a triumph for human rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 12 November, 2012 Share Posted 12 November, 2012 I am getting to the stage of wondering how much longer deportation or imprisonment for any crime will be allowed as it obviously harms "human rights" That's the problem with 'universal' rights, you can't pick and choose who they apply to. ( And before TDD lumps me in with the 'get along gang' I think he should have gone years ago, but as it stands the legal eagles on both sides are anticpating another 18 months of fees as the next loops around the appeal circuit take place ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 13 November, 2012 Share Posted 13 November, 2012 Just put him on the next RAF aircraft to Akrotiri, let the Jordanians pick him up there. The French do it regularly, we should just do the same. Might make a few more run for it. This. If he tries to re-enter the country, do it again and again. Dont wait for any more appeals to complete, just DO IT. All the courts can do is shout at the Home Office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mightysaints Posted 13 November, 2012 Share Posted 13 November, 2012 Blame Blair,he signed us up,funny how his wife is one of the biggest money makers in Human rights lawyers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 13 November, 2012 Share Posted 13 November, 2012 Blame Blair,he signed us up,funny how his wife is one of the biggest money makers in Human rights lawyers. Why not blame the judges who actually made the decision, or the Jordanians for allegedly using evidence obtained by torture ? Or for that matter, why not blame the Home Secretary and Minister for Justice who describe Quatada as a 'terrorist' and a 'threat to UK security' but can't find anything to charge him with. Quatada is, perhaps unfortunately, entitled under the law to the same rights and protections as you or I - the main issue, IMO, is how he got into the country in the first place - using a forged passport and then claiming asylum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 13 November, 2012 Share Posted 13 November, 2012 I reckon it should be arranged for him to fall down the stairs and break his f**king neck when leaving his cell to be released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 13 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 13 November, 2012 Stain . Sadly One part of me does say that if its the only way to get some of these judges and lawyers to see sense in the stupitdy of their decision. I hope they do not but those that have made that judgement have now put many people living here at greater risk. What would happen if brevik was to escape and comne here and pleaded his human rights would be infringed. Jundges and lawyers would know doubt try to justify his life woulf be endanger if he was sent back to Norway The law is an ass at times and this judgement is just plain stupid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 13 November, 2012 Share Posted 13 November, 2012 (edited) What would happen if brevik was to escape and comne here and pleaded his human rights would be infringed. Jundges and lawyers would know doubt try to justify his life woulf be endanger if he was sent back to Norway Rubbish. The sticking point with Quatada is a 'minor', ( to quote a lawyer on R4 this morning ), clause in the Jordanian Legal Code that relates to the admissibility of evidence, possibly obtained by torture, provided by his co-accused. I'm fairly certain that the Norwegians don't use torture on suspects or witnesses. Edited 13 November, 2012 by badgerx16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 13 November, 2012 Share Posted 13 November, 2012 Rubbish. The sticking point with Quatada is a 'minor' ( to quote a lawyer on R4 this morning ), clause in the Jordanian Legal Code that relates to the admissibility of evidence, possibly obtained by torture, provided by his co-accused. I'm fairly certain that the Norwegians don't use torture on suspects or witnesses. I can tell you that people on the case don't see him as a minor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 13 November, 2012 Share Posted 13 November, 2012 I can tell you that people on the case don't see him as a minor Read Badger's post again, Jamie. He didn't say Qtada was minor, he said the 'sticking point' was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 13 November, 2012 Share Posted 13 November, 2012 Just been released.... BBC Breaking News @BBCBreaking Muslim cleric Abu Qatada released on bail from Long Lartin prison in Worcestershire http://bbc.in/QDz1IW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 13 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 13 November, 2012 Okay Badger im referring to the misuse and miinterpreation of the human rights act. Any body can use it to postone court ruling for what ever they want to use it for, there are lawyers out there who use it to get rich, Yes there are genuine cases that need to be protected. but it appears to be a bit of a free for all. You say Norwegians dont use torture which is probably correct but Assange has used the same arguments etc to avoid deportation to sweeden , still the could thiong about him holed up in an embassy in london is the folk that stood bail for him have now lost it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 13 November, 2012 Share Posted 13 November, 2012 Okay Badger im referring to the misuse and miinterpreation of the human rights act. In what way has the HRAct been 'misused' or 'misinterpreted' ? Are you a better legal expert than the Special Immigration Appeals Court ? The Court's judgement says quite clearly that the Home Secretary has failed to conclusively demonstrate that 'unreliable' evidence will not be used in any trial Qatada would be subject to in Jordan. This 'evidence' was allegedly obtained by torture when 2 supposed accomplices were interrogated about 10 years ago. The 'minor' point referred to earlier is a clarification in the Jordanian Legal Code that this evidence cannot be so used. The judgement can found here http://www.siac.tribunals.gov.uk/Documents/Othman_substantive_judgment.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 13 November, 2012 Share Posted 13 November, 2012 It's ridiculous, but it is a one off and an exception rather than the norm. So we shouldn't change our standards of human rights for everyone else just because of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 13 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 13 November, 2012 Badger No I am not a better legal expert than SAIC , but you know exactly where I am coming from . The HRA has been abused and distorted on many occassions. even a couple get compensation under the act becuase they were told they were having a boy or a girl and infact the had the opposite this compenstaion was done under the said act. I judge from your comments that this lovely caring man that you appear to be defending should not be deported. So tell me do you think he is innocent of the alleged crimes he has committed or do you think the Jordanians etc have made the story up. Do you feel sad the Capt Hook was recently deported. In my opinion which is not worth a great deal qatada should not be in this country nor should other individuals who committed similar atrocities Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 13 November, 2012 Share Posted 13 November, 2012 (edited) I judge from your comments that this lovely caring man that you appear to be defending should not be deported. So tell me do you think he is innocent of the alleged crimes he has committed or do you think the Jordanians etc have made the story up. Do you feel sad the Capt Hook was recently deported. I respectfully refer my Learned Friend to post #7; ".....I think he should have gone years ago....." I have no opinion on the charges he faces, and it is up to the Jordanian's to make their own judgement in accordance with their own legal system. However, I also expect the Home Secretary and her legal advisers to be sufficiently competent that they can get what needs to be done signed off. It is an absolute given that you are 'innocent until proven guilty', and that is why the bint with the scales, who stands on top of the Old Bailey, is wearing a blindfold. On this basis Qatada, Hamsa, and even Bin Laden should he have been taken alive, are entitled to the same interpretation of the Law as you or I. If you believe that the HRAct is flawed then it is up to the politicians to change it, the Judges work strictly to the words placed before them. Edited 13 November, 2012 by badgerx16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 13 November, 2012 Share Posted 13 November, 2012 This. If he tries to re-enter the country, do it again and again. Dont wait for any more appeals to complete, just DO IT. All the courts can do is shout at the Home Office. Send him to Hampshire. Alps lasted two weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 13 November, 2012 Share Posted 13 November, 2012 Send him to Hampshire. Alps lasted two weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 13 November, 2012 Share Posted 13 November, 2012 Lolz at the moronic EDL guy on 5live this morning, ranting the same as alpine and getting cut off by Nick Campbell for his own safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 13 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 13 November, 2012 I uphold the principles of innocent till proven guilty as mentioned on the saville thread . The hr act is an ass and there are many cases of it being used for the wrong purposes . It's used in employment cases notably grievances of one kind or another Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokyo-Saint Posted 13 November, 2012 Share Posted 13 November, 2012 Whats the latest i 'He's a radical cleric, get him out of here'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 It's ridiculous, but it is a one off and an exception rather than the norm. Rubbish. Qatada's case is providing a route-map for how such people can avoid being deported in future. We need a game-changer. The UK needs to tear up the Human Rights Act. I couldnt give a shiny one what the rest of the world thinks about the UK for doing this, our historical credentials for standing up to tyranny, bullies and opressive regimes speak for themselves. We dont need barely-qualified idiot judges from nations that have been either invaded and/or oppressed telling us what is just or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seaford Saint Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 Personally I think fat people should diet or lose their human rights.....the world can't afford those who eat more than their fair share. Then there are the spongers, their rights should also go as well. What exactly did this guy do? Why hasn't he been charged? Who let him in this country? Did he ever work for MI5? What do any of us really know about him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 Rubbish. Qatada's case is providing a route-map for how such people can avoid being deported in future. We need a game-changer. The UK needs to tear up the Human Rights Act. I couldnt give a shiny one what the rest of the world thinks about the UK for doing this, our historical credentials for standing up to tyranny, bullies and opressive regimes speak for themselves. We dont need barely-qualified idiot judges from nations that have been either invaded and/or oppressed telling us what is just or not. You do realise that the HRAct was put in place to enable British judges to make rulings in British cases - repeal it and these cases will all simply be referred up to Strasbourg, as we will still be bound by the 1950 European Convention, ( which by the way was Winston Churchill's idea ). I fail to see why the Qatada case is a misuse of the Act - his lawyers have successfully argued to a British judge that the Home Secretary has failed to provide assurance that evidence obtained from torture will not be used. This is the only point on which the appeal was upheld, others were dismissed. Teresa May and her legal advisors are to blame, as were all previous Home Secretaries involved in this case; the man is an II who used a forged passport to gain entry to the country, he should have been removed years ago, but the authorities have time and again proved to be incompetent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 14 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 14 November, 2012 Spot on Badger "the authorities have time and again proved to be incompetent and as such the lawyers have been able to exploit this incompetence" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 14 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 14 November, 2012 This is where the law is an ass A terrorist is released yet this guy gets two years for being given a present by the Iraqi Army Sgt Danny Nightingale was sentenced to 18 months by a court martial for illegally possessing the 9mm Glock – given to him by the Iraqi army furious military wife whose SAS hero husband has been jailed for possessing a war trophy pistol said the Army “hung him out to dry”. Sgt Danny Nightingale, who has served his country for 17 years, was sentenced to 18 months by a court martial last week for illegally possessing the 9mm Glock – given to him by the Iraqi army for outstanding service. Now the special forces sniper’s devastated wife Sally claims he was betrayed and that the family face losing their home after his pay was stopped. She said yesterday: “I had to tell my two daughters – Mara, who is five and Alys, who’s just two and a half – that daddy wasn’t coming home. “I cannot bear to tell them that he’s in prison and will not be home for a long time. “Danny has been hung out to dry. He is a hero who has been betrayed by the Army and the Government.” Danny will be discharged from the Army and get a criminal record. Even his former comm*anding officer in Iraq blasted the sentence. Lt Col Richard Williams said: “His military career has been ruined and his wife and children face being evicted – this is a total betrayal of a man who dedicated his life to the service of his country.” Danny had planned to fight the charge but pleaded guilty after he was warned he could face five years in prison if he lost. He was given the Glock in 2007 after serving in Iraq fighting al-Qaeda and planned to donate it to his regiment as a war trophy. But he came home in a hurry when two friends were killed there, leaving colleagues to pack up his equipment – including the pistol. And when he collapsed during an SAS fundraising trek in 2009, experts said he suffered severe memory loss. Last year, he was living in a house with another soldier whose estranged wife claimed he kept ammo there and police found Danny’s Glock in a raid. Sally added: “Two expert witnesses said it was completely possible that his brain injury meant that he never knew the gun existed.” Danny’s legal team aims to appeal. His lawyer Simon McKay said: “I consider the sentence to be excessive and the basis of the guilty plea unsafe.” Its amazing this country, We live in the UK where it is OK for Muslims to burn our flag, shout abuse at our soldiers, and we free Clerics who public speak on the UK streets calling for Muslim brothers throughout the world to kill uk soldiers, and we jail our SAS heros. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 Live and let live Viking saint Otherwise we are no better than the nazis Or some shyte Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 Live and let live Viking saint Otherwise we are no better than the nazis Or some shyte From the report that Viking has quoted it would appear that this case, on the face of it a massive miscarriage of justice, was tried by the military rather than the civilian process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 You do realise that the HRAct was put in place to enable British judges to make rulings in British cases - repeal it and these cases will all simply be referred up to Strasbourg, as we will still be bound by the 1950 European Convention, ( which by the way was Winston Churchill's idea ). I fail to see why the Qatada case is a misuse of the Act - his lawyers have successfully argued to a British judge that the Home Secretary has failed to provide assurance that evidence obtained from torture will not be used. This is the only point on which the appeal was upheld, others were dismissed. Teresa May and her legal advisors are to blame, as were all previous Home Secretaries involved in this case; the man is an II who used a forged passport to gain entry to the country, he should have been removed years ago, but the authorities have time and again proved to be incompetent. THIS. Problem seems to be that some simply cant distinguish between legislation that is designed to protect anyone from being sent to countries in which a fair trial would not happen something that we can be proud of in that it was our legal system that most of the world has adopted which preserves teh right to a fair trial etc, and mistakes made by Government laywers that allow for this evil ****'s successful appeal. ...however, on a point of principle, even if it was not mistakes, if we have a system that preserves an individual's rights to a fair trial, we need to be prepared that now and again this will mean nasty characters such as this will not be sent to places where this can not be guarranteed -ss difficult as that is to reconcile, still believe its part of what makes Britain great - we have a civilised and robust system that does not simply give in to public opinion when it suits and offers the same standard of leagl protection to all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 This is where the law is an ass A terrorist is released yet this guy gets two years for being given a present by the Iraqi Army Sgt Danny Nightingale was sentenced to 18 months by a court martial for illegally possessing the 9mm Glock – given to him by the Iraqi army furious military wife whose SAS hero husband has been jailed for possessing a war trophy pistol said the Army “hung him out to dry”. Sgt Danny Nightingale, who has served his country for 17 years, was sentenced to 18 months by a court martial last week for illegally possessing the 9mm Glock – given to him by the Iraqi army for outstanding service. Now the special forces sniper’s devastated wife Sally claims he was betrayed and that the family face losing their home after his pay was stopped. She said yesterday: “I had to tell my two daughters – Mara, who is five and Alys, who’s just two and a half – that daddy wasn’t coming home. “I cannot bear to tell them that he’s in prison and will not be home for a long time. “Danny has been hung out to dry. He is a hero who has been betrayed by the Army and the Government.” Danny will be discharged from the Army and get a criminal record. Even his former comm*anding officer in Iraq blasted the sentence. Lt Col Richard Williams said: “His military career has been ruined and his wife and children face being evicted – this is a total betrayal of a man who dedicated his life to the service of his country.” Danny had planned to fight the charge but pleaded guilty after he was warned he could face five years in prison if he lost. He was given the Glock in 2007 after serving in Iraq fighting al-Qaeda and planned to donate it to his regiment as a war trophy. But he came home in a hurry when two friends were killed there, leaving colleagues to pack up his equipment – including the pistol. And when he collapsed during an SAS fundraising trek in 2009, experts said he suffered severe memory loss. Last year, he was living in a house with another soldier whose estranged wife claimed he kept ammo there and police found Danny’s Glock in a raid. Sally added: “Two expert witnesses said it was completely possible that his brain injury meant that he never knew the gun existed.” Danny’s legal team aims to appeal. His lawyer Simon McKay said: “I consider the sentence to be excessive and the basis of the guilty plea unsafe.” Its amazing this country, We live in the UK where it is OK for Muslims to burn our flag, shout abuse at our soldiers, and we free Clerics who public speak on the UK streets calling for Muslim brothers throughout the world to kill uk soldiers, and we jail our SAS heros. I feel sick. Sick at this story, and sick that someone like Saintandy666 will come along and try to justify the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 (edited) I feel sick. Sick at this story, and sick that someone like Saintandy666 will come along and try to justify the difference. But there is a difference, the soldier was tried at a military trubunal. I'm not sure about the admissibility of evidence of mental breakdown, etc, in a Court Martial, but I hope that had this been before a civilian judge his mitigating circumstances would have had much more sway. Edited 14 November, 2012 by badgerx16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Kucho Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 Just change the rules and deport him. Whatever the EU says, the French do this to remove them Romanian gypsies, we can do the same to remove someone who promotes hate. (Better still, get out of the EU all together) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 Just change the rules and deport him. Whatever the EU says, the French do this to remove them Romanian gypsies, we can do the same to remove someone who promotes hate. (Better still, get out of the EU all together) Yes, I dont know why the UK government dont just say "F*ck off, hes going, do your worst European courts" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 Maybe this is all part of the bigger picture with the EU The Tories want out pretty much I would guess that if it came to a vote for the public, enough of these stories will be in the bag to persuade us to vote out Sooner we are out of the EU, the better Open boarder policies Losing control of the laws of our own land The mental amount of money paid in The stupid fishing quotas that cripple the fishermen The negatives of the EU outweigh the positives for sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 We aren't loosing control of anything though. There is only one Abu Qatada. He is the exception. We can't go changing our laws and risk everyone else's freedom just for someone like him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 We aren't loosing control of anything though. There is only one Abu Qatada. He is the exception. We can't go changing our laws and risk everyone else's freedom just for someone like him. We are andy. We play by rules not many want to and it seems we can't change it Even if the Tories wanted to stop mass immigration, they can't without breaking rules Is this country in a position to accepted hundreds of thousands of extra immigrants in the next many years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 This is nothing to do with the European Union FFS- it is the European Convention on Human Rights that forms the basis of the Human Rights Act. If you want a debate at least argue over the correct bit of paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 We are andy. We play by rules not many want to and it seems we can't change it Even if the Tories wanted to stop mass immigration, they can't without breaking rules Is this country in a position to accepted hundreds of thousands of extra immigrants in the next many years It's not that simple, or desirable to just stop migration. Like it or loathe it, the demographics of our country means we will need migrant workers in the future. And badger is absolutely right. This has nothing do to with the EU, it is the ECHR which is an entirely different organisation with a much wider membership too. And reforming the HRA doesn't really change anything either as all the HRA does is make ECHR protections accessible in the UK so people don't have to travel to the ECHR every time they want to take something to that level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Kucho Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 We aren't loosing control of anything though. There is only one Abu Qatada. He is the exception. We can't go changing our laws and risk everyone else's freedom just for someone like him. We aren't loosing control of anything, or anyone? (not all EU related, but enough proof we need to change the rules to kick all these foreign criminals out, starting with this quatada bloke) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2161912/Stop-giving-foreign-criminals-right-stay-UK-say-MPs-following-landmark-vote.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/9335689/Judges-who-allow-foreign-criminals-to-stay-in-Britain.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/9566479/177-foreign-criminals-avoid-deportation-on-family-rights-grounds.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/4000-foreign-criminals-at-large-in-the-uk-7754031.html http://www.metro.co.uk/news/110734-quit-uk-deal-for-foreign-criminals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 This is nothing to do with the European Union FFS- it is the European Convention on Human Rights that forms the basis of the Human Rights Act. If you want a debate at least argue over the correct bit of paper. The whole lot. Get rid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 (edited) The whole lot. Get rid You are aware that we don't have an empire any more ? Isolationism won't work. This is from a Guardian article : "However, the European convention on human rights is part of our DNA. It is not "someone else's law". It was never imposed on Britain. The UK proposed the creation of the convention at the end of the second world war – largely at the suggestion of Winston Churchill. It was designed to ensure that the atrocities and mass murder committed by totalitarian states before and during the war would never be repeated. The rights contained in the convention can be traced back to Magna Carta and to other laws long established in the UK. Indeed, it has well been said that the convention marked – and continues to mark – "a vital codification of the common law, not its repudiation"." http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/nov/21/convention-human-rights-britain-coalition Edited 14 November, 2012 by badgerx16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 (edited) What the hell has the empire got to do with anything? I don't think the UK will turn into some sort of murderous state and don't feel we need an at times restrictive set of rules to make sure we don't All of the good the ECHR could be continued without their governance...I believe we are civilised to do that. But, I also believe that we should be free to deport known and proved dangerous people should we wish That does not mean a slippery slope to being a nazi. It means looking after the greater population Edited 14 November, 2012 by Thedelldays Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 What the hell has the empire got to do with anything? I don't think the UK will turn into some sort of murderous state and don't feel we need an at times restrictive set of rules to make sure we don't All of the good the ECHR could be continued without their governance...I believe we are civilised to do that. But, I also believe that we should be free to deport known and proved dangerous people should we wish That does not mean a slippery slope to being a nazi. It means looking after the greater population We are free to deport criminals. It's just that certain standards have to be met. If you believe in human rights, then you have to apply them to everyone, regardless of whether they are nice people or not. I kind of like the ECHR. It's good to have that outside protection. What we do need is a proper supreme court like the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 But, I also believe that we should be free to deport known and proved dangerous people should we wish Qatada hasn't been deported because the Home Office have messed up. This is the judgement of a British court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 14 November, 2012 Share Posted 14 November, 2012 You are aware that we don't have an empire any more ? Isolationism won't work. This is from a Guardian article : "However, the European convention on human rights is part of our DNA. It is not "someone else's law". It was never imposed on Britain. The UK proposed the creation of the convention at the end of the second world war – largely at the suggestion of Winston Churchill. It was designed to ensure that the atrocities and mass murder committed by totalitarian states before and during the war would never be repeated. The rights contained in the convention can be traced back to Magna Carta and to other laws long established in the UK. Indeed, it has well been said that the convention marked – and continues to mark – "a vital codification of the common law, not its repudiation"." http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/nov/21/convention-human-rights-britain-coalition There are enough countries in the world still willing to trade with us, such as the Commonwealth, NAFTA and emerging economies in the Far East. We dont need the EU, and besides, I beleive I read that in the last couple of months the balance of our exports to EU countries compared to RoW countries fell into negative for the first time in about 30 years. Oh, WTF has this to do with the Empire ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now