Judges liken terror laws to Nazi Germany

[fela fan]

Like I said Fela, its no use knocking when there is no one in mate!
I've given up!

Don't blame you mate. Any day now, so do i. The last link i have with all this mess is writing here on urban.

But what i'd really like to get to the bottom of is why we accept what to me is insanity, yet cannot or will not recognise this madness for what it is. I know fear has a lot to do with it. Maybe it's all.

When i solve this connundrum, i'll do my book and then truly bugger off into the mountains. There's a magical town called pai just three hours from me. Heard of it?

Either way, you're right, some big shit is going to hit the fan soon enough. I reckon in under a decade, but could be any day now really. The world is spinning on an axis of insanity, and as yet too many just can't see this. But nature will strike back...

 

[TAE]

If some epidemic does not wipe us out before we run out of natural resources, there will certainly be some big changes to politics in the UK soon.

Labour are already running the country on only a 35% majority, the house-of-lords seems to be slowly being reshaped in Blair's image, and the two main parties are becoming ever more similar (if you ignore the party colours and culture).

I still think that having a written constitution with hard-to-change human rights built into it and proportional representation could make a huge difference, but it would take a huge street based movement to get there.

 

[fela fan]

I still think that having a written constitution with hard-to-change human rights built into it and proportional representation could make a huge difference, but it would take a huge street based movement to get there.

But, the problem will remain: what to do about our media? They are the public's watchdog in a functioning democracy. It is their job, as the fourth estate, to ferret out abuses of power by those in power.

There is just so much that the british press don't write about, that if they did, then blair would be in prison, not instead being our dear leader currently embarking upon a process that could feasibly end up with britain being a police state, at least to some degree.

Separating the link between media owners and politicians might be a start. Not being allowed to own more than more publication might be another. A return to fearless journos who insist on reporting the truth as they see it might be yet another.

Better fucking education might be the best of the lot!

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Why is this link not talked about? Why is it not part of the public discourse??

What, you mean like it appearing in all the major newspapers and on TV, and being discussed in conversation, on boards, blogs etc etc?

 

[jiggajagga]

I still think that having a written constitution with hard-to-change human rights built into it and proportional representation could make a huge difference, but it would take a huge street based movement to get there.

I'd suggest that we should all rise up and crush the oppressors but in Blairland I could end up being arrested and imprisoned without trial so I'd better be careful what I say!!!

 

[fela fan]

What, you mean like it appearing in all the major newspapers and on TV, and being discussed in conversation, on boards, blogs etc etc?

the link i was talking about? I don't think so mate.

 

[tbaldwin]

These 'Judges' should be all given a reverse ASBO. Forced to live in depressed areas alongside real people for a couple of months. Maybe that would change their tune... Blair is right, the Constitution says Parliament is supreme. You're supposed to learn that in Law School. Obviously these do-gooders didn't study as much as they should have.

Too true. The best thing to do would be to send 5,000 anti social criminals and 100 high court judges to a deserted island like st kilda off scotland.

Film it for BBC call it something like "Island Nightmares"

 

[fela fan]

Too true. The best thing to do would be to send 5,000 anti social criminals and 100 high court judges to a deserted island like st kilda off scotland.

Film it for BBC call it something like "Island Nightmares"

Bung blair and clarke into that mix, for sure.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

the link i was talking about? I don't think so mate.

And what site, exactly does that link go to? Is it, perchance, a major national newspaper?

 

[tbaldwin]

Bung blair and clarke into that mix, for sure.

Its an idea but to be honest St Kilda is a very small island and there are far better candidates than them two.
Lee Jasper should probably have an Island to himself with his large head and unpleasant personality.
And shitty bosses and lawyers we are going to have to put them somewhere.
And what about all those scummy charity workers and public sector parasites?.
Posh and Becks?
Perhaps we need to find more uninhabated Islands off Scotland.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Its an idea but to be honest St Kilda is a very small island and there are far better candidates than them two.
Lee Jasper should probably have an Island to himself with his large head and unpleasant personality.
And shitty bosses and lawyers we are going to have to put them somewhere.
And what about all those scummy charity workers and public sector parasites?.
Posh and Becks?
Perhaps we need to find more uninhabated Islands off Scotland.

Perhap you'll nominate yourself for transportation to an island in the mid-Atlantic?

 

[tbaldwin]

Perhap you'll nominate yourself for transportation to an island in the mid-Atlantic?

Now now, just as i thought i'd made another trendy friend you disappoint me like this....

 

[ViolentPanda]

Now now, just as i thought i'd made another trendy friend you disappoint me like this....

If you think I'm "trendy" you must be either a tramp or a pensioner who wears those high-waisted trousers.

 

[Poi E]

These 'Judges' should be all given a reverse ASBO. Forced to live in depressed areas alongside real people for a couple of months. Maybe that would change their tune... Blair is right, the Constitution says Parliament is supreme. You're supposed to learn that in Law School. Obviously these do-gooders didn't study as much as they should have.

Fuck it we're supreme, not Parliament. Any judge standing up for individual liberties is alright by me. Showing a bit of balls at the moment where MPs remain pretty quiet.

edit: er, I missed the irony...doh.

 

[kasheem]

There isn't any irony. The 'Constitution' says parliament is supreme. Any lawyer will tell you that. I'm personally anti-parliament but that's the facts.

 

[fela fan]

And what site, exactly does that link go to? Is it, perchance, a major national newspaper?

Not that kind of link silly. As was apparant from my post, i was talking about a connection between two things, a link between two things. No need to repeat those two things, it's in my original post.

Ironically one of the two things was all your bloody national newspapers! Useless things that they are.

 

[Poi E]

There isn't any irony. The 'Constitution' says parliament is supreme. Any lawyer will tell you that. I'm personally anti-parliament but that's the facts.

This has nothing to do with Parliamentary supremacy. It is about Judges reserving the right ot comment on (1) very poorly drafted legislation and (2) continuing encroachments on individual liberties and (3) respond to an executive that is attempting to tell judges how to apply law. The last point raises serious issues of the executive breaching the separation of powers. The day that judges say that they will not apply statutes is the day that issues of Parliamentary supremacy are relevant. The "facts" that you allude to are not enshrined in any supreme law. If you wish to run arguments based on the constitution, the Queen is supreme, not Parliament, as she has the power to convene and dissolve it and to refuse to give royal assent to any legislation that passes through and is approved by both Houses.

So you think that judges should not be standing up for civil liberties in this manner? If so, you are a fool.

 

[tbaldwin]

If you think I'm "trendy" you must be either a tramp or a pensioner who wears those high-waisted trousers.

Its your views VP not your clothes. There dull and predictable,with not much of any real substance.With just the right amount of self righteousness thrown in. Thats why i call you a trendy.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Its your views VP not your clothes. There dull and predictable,with not much of any real substance.With just the right amount of self righteousness thrown in. Thats why i call you a trendy.

And your simplistic quantification of my views (or any that don't match yours) is why I call you an arsehole. Simple really. You talk about substance, but all you mouth is nationalist populism with a bit of ill-defined redistributive rhetoric thrown in.

BTW, agreeing with "Kasheem" is even more likely to get you tarred as a rightwinger (considering what kind of troll he is) than your normal buffoonery.

 

[tbaldwin]

And your simplistic quantification of my views (or any that don't match yours) is why I call you an arsehole. Simple really. You talk about substance, but all you mouth is nationalist populism with a bit of ill-defined redistributive rhetoric thrown in.

BTW, agreeing with "Kasheem" is even more likely to get you tarred as a rightwinger (considering what kind of troll he is) than your normal buffoonery.

Kasheem is a right winger? Compared to who. Most of the people on U75 have politics that is elitist bollocks. Stuck up snobs who support more money for a privelleged group like H/E students and taking the people poor countries need most. Its hard for me to understand how Kasheem could actually be more right wing than that......

 

[tbaldwin]

And your simplistic quantification of my views (or any that don't match yours) is why I call you an arsehole. Simple really. You talk about substance, but all you mouth is nationalist populism with a bit of ill-defined redistributive rhetoric thrown in.

.

nationalist populism...... And how do you define my views as Nationalist.......
What Nation?

 

[kyser_soze]

fela...just so we're clear:

Some tentative steps are being taken to flex those muscles.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/articl...1841452,00.html

Most powers are in place now. The technology is at a useable level. The judicial system is partially usurped.

Why wait?

"The move, confirmed last night by Charles Clarke, the Home Secretary, means that extremists convicted under the new legislation could be jailed for seven years and suspects held without charge for up to three months."

So, so far to my knowledge, that is suspected terrorists, suspected animal rights activists, and suspected football hooligans that the police or mr clarke or mr blair can lock up for three months with no charge, and no dealings with courts. What other kinds of people will be added to the list? Have i missed any?

And people say britain is not turning into a police state? Such actions that clarke and blair talk about are EXACTLY actions taken in police states. So is state execution - and blair's been very active in that department in his tenure of office.

Britain is getting more and more like thailand every year.

It's just fucking unbelievable what is not discussed in the media in britain. Look, here's that man clarke again:


Speaking to the joint Lords and Commons human rights committee, he said: “I certainly think that animal rights terrorism is something that has to be attacked. Those who argue that committing violent acts of terror to promote the cause of animal rights and who justify it by referring to it would be covered by this legislation.”


Firstly, coz he thinks that, then that's what's gonna be eh? Just like thaksin in thailand.

Secondly this is the man talking who belongs to a government who are mass-terrorists themselves. He wants to throw animal activists into prison, but doesn't want to go to prison himself for the crimes against humans and humanity that his government have been perpetrating.

Why is this link not talked about? Why is it not part of the public discourse?? Why do we allow terrorists to dictate how our country should be run, and yet not see them for what they are: terrorists.

I assume by this that you mean the 'link' between Clarke and the Blair government being 'terrorists' not being debated in the press, not that actual article on timesonline? (which incidentally is a point raised in British newspapers in the Comment sections of most of the broadsheets - IIRC the Spectator has also published at least one piece on it as a cover story.

As to the main thrust of the thread, until the vast majority of people are actually affected by this in their daily lives nothing will be done - plus the HRA is already in place in UK legislation so there's all the fun of the European Court to follow this.

 

[ViolentPanda]

nationalist populism...... And how do you define my views as Nationalist.......

Because you spout the same right-labour "us first in front of everyone else" bollocks about immigration that I've been hearing for the last 40+ years, you fart on about reparations (as if they would do any good to the people that lost out, but never mention the iniquities of promising Commonwealth citizens britiish citizenship and then reneging. You can dress yourself up as a socialist as much as you like, but the nearest you've probably gotten to socialism is being either Blairite or Healyite. You're about as radical as a wet sponge and as socialist as a pool of piss.

What Nation?

Ah, this is the bit where I name one nation and you tell a little white lie by saying "but I'm not 'X', I'm 'Y' ".
I don't think I'll bite on that one, thanks all the same.

 

[tbaldwin]

Funny that VP,
Ive always thought of you as a bit of a secret fan of mine.
You could never understand my Socialism,VP. Because you believe in "Socialism from Above" and an Intellectual elite.
You dont want the masses in contol,but you would like control of the masses.

 

[kasheem]

You can dress yourself up as a socialist as much as you like, but the nearest you've probably gotten to socialism is being either Blairite or Healyite. You're about as radical as a wet sponge and as socialist as a pool of piss.

Oooh... "I'm more radical than you are!" "No you're not, I am! You don't even know what a healyite is!" "Shut up!! I'm the Real... Rrrrevolutionary!"

Don't you ever feel ashamed of yourselves?

 

[tbaldwin]

Oooh... "I'm more radical than you are!" "No you're not, I am! You don't even know what a healyite is!" "Shut up!! I'm the Real... Rrrrevolutionary!"

Don't you ever feel ashamed of yourselves?

For laughing at VP, No never.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

I must admit, having read all that stuff about sending judges off to re-enact Lord of the Flies someplace, I'm a bit puzzled as to how it's meant to relate to the anti-terror laws. (Not that it wouldn't make an amusing tv show)

Could someone explain that for me? Perhaps I'm being a bit slow today ...

 

[ViolentPanda]

Funny that VP,
Ive always thought of you as a bit of a secret fan of mine.
You could never understand my Socialism,VP. Because you believe in "Socialism from Above" and an Intellectual elite.
You dont want the masses in contol,but you would like control of the masses.

You haven't got a clue, have you?
You "extrapolate" (I put the word in quotation marks because it isn't really extrapolation, just wild guessing on your part) my politics to be that because I disagree with you.

Guess what?

Totally wrong.

You're just a tawdry name-caller.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Oooh... "I'm more radical than you are!" "No you're not, I am! You don't even know what a healyite is!" "Shut up!! I'm the Real... Rrrrevolutionary!"

Don't you ever feel ashamed of yourselves?

Do you ever feel ashamed of yourself?

I ask because I'd guess you've got much more to be ashamed of than most. trollboy.

 

[ViolentPanda]

For laughing at VP, No never.

Me, I don't laugh at you, I think people like you are death to serious politics because you don't appear to understand what the fuck you're gabbling about half the time.

You just mouth your stupid generalisations about "trendies" and "fashionable ideas" (sounding for all the world like a rightwing tabloid) and think that substitutes for substantive discussion (yes, that's right, discussion).

Guess what? It doesn't, it puts people off of politics.