Blair government gives two fingers to the constitution
Hey, it was predictable, right? The Lords is only the highest court in the land - why the hell should the government listen to them when they vote 8 to 1 that the detention without charge of terror suspects is illegal? And who's this Lord Hoffman chap to tell them that "The real threat to the life of the nation, in the sense of a people living in accordance with its traditional laws and political values, comes not from terrorism but from laws such as these"?
After all, until we introduce a supreme court the Law Lords are not democratic because of some guff they always spout about separation of powers. I mean, so what if the Cabinet sits within the legislature and so, by the same logic the government uses to discredit the Law Lords, has no right to say anything?
We're talking about TERRORISM here, people. This is a TIME OF CRISIS. It's no time for petty legal wrangling. WE COULD ALL BE KILLED IN A MASSIVE EXPLOSION OR THROUGH EVIL BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS AND STUFF AT ANY MOMENT. Are you really going to allow some old man in a wig tell you that nice, smiling Tony is wrong? Hey - your super, soaraway Sun (and that lovely Mr Murdoch) agrees with Tony, and WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK YOU ARE TO TAKE A CONTRARY VIEW, EH?
Hey, look, that nice Mr Clarke says that these so-called judges are wrong, and so does that lovely Mr Straw, so they must be. He seems to agree with that nice Mr Blukett about these sort of airy fairy, libertarian nonsense being almost as dangerous as the TERRORISTS CHARGING AT US OUT OF THE SKY ARMED WITH LOTS OF BOMBS!
Nosemonkey would like to make clear that he fully supports the Blair government in every single decision that it ever makes, and will never dare dissent in any way, shape or form, as it is abundantly clear that that would simply aid the TERRORISTS WITH THEIR BOMBS.
CHRISTMAS IS EXACTLY THE TIME OF YEAR THEY ARE MOST LIKELY TO STRIKE! GAS ATTACKS! BOMBS! DIRTY BOMBS! HIJACKINGS! A SOLDIER WITH A MACHINE GUN ON EVERY STREET CORNER! MANDATORY BIOMETRIC ID FOR EVERY CITIZEN! FEAR! TERROR! ONLY THE LEADER CAN SAVE US! NO ONE ELSE IS CAPABLE OF LEADING US TO VICTORY OVER THE EVIL, FREEDOM-HATING TERRORISTS!
(Nosemonkey is hungover and really quite incredibly filled with rage)
Edit: Oh, and nominate me - you know it makes sense. If you don't you're only supporting the terrorists.
6 Comments:
Certainly, officer - he're my ID card with my finger-prints, retina scan, medical history, address, and a complete record of everyone I've ever spoken to on it. As you can see, I had a brief chat with a gentleman of Arabic extraction in a cafe in the spring of 1993, and as such I utterly demand that the government lock me up for the rest of my life for the good of freedom and democracy.
Apropos the comments about this ruling yesterday I had a look at the law pertaining to the ECHR when it was introduced, it was not introduced as a successor to our existing civil rights but as an addition, what it does is to allow or compel the Law Lords to consider the human rights act when making their judgments. However, a finding by the European Court of Human Rights of a violation of a Convention right does not have the effect of automatically changing United Kingdom law and practice: that is a matter for the United Kingdom Government and Parliament. It follows that, in cases where a violation has been found, the State concerned must ensure that any deficiency in its internal laws is rectified so as to bring them into line with the Convention. The State is responsible for deciding what changes are needed, but it must satisfy the Committee of Ministers that the steps taken are sufficient.
Telegraph:
"Indefinite detention is contrary to Article 5 of the Human Rights Convention. But Article 15 of the convention allows governments to "derogate" from, or opt out of, certain articles "in time of war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation"
The detainees' core submission was that Mr Blunkett was wrong to conclude that Article 15 applied in Britain after September 11. None of the other 45 countries in the Council of Europe - 46 from today - had opted out of the convention in this way.
In asking the law lords to declare the 2001 legislation incompatible with the Human Rights Convention, Mr Emmerson stressed that such a declaration would not circumvent the will of Parliament. It would simplify notify the legislature that it had "proceeded under a misapprehension" in thinking that the legislation was compatible with human rights."
But we should also accept that these people are free to leave prison any time they wish, but the government has decided that as they pose a risk to our safety, they are therefore not permitted free entry into the country.
You filthy terrorist scum. Please report to the Home Office for "re-education" immediately.
I've just got back to the office after a four hour lunch involving several bottles of wine, champagne and lobster with garlic butter (which probably makes me French, and so a TERRORIST). I am slightly less hungover, but still enraged.
Hi nosemonkey and all,
Although I now live in Texas, I hail from G Brown's constituency, a real socialist heartland. Today, there are 8 Lords, which some in my hometown would call "class enemies", that I would happily buy a drink for. Is there any way conceivable we can make Blair run for the Tory Party leadership and take Straw et al with him, leaving 'Gay Gordon' in charge of the Labour Party? Just a thought.
Regards, Cernig
Newshog
How do you know they are terrorists? what evidence do you have? or are you perfectly willing to listen to the word of an individual within government? The last home secretary said he didn't fast track a visa, how do you know he didn't? Iraq has WMD, oh no it doesn't, yes it does? xyz says it dont. OK I am a lying bastard.
JUSTICE
A non eu mouse
Post a Comment