Brexit busted.


... OK. Now, you're arguing to all of us that we need to remain in the EU because, according to you, the EU is 'gay friendly'.

Somehow I don't see that as being the deciding factor, amongst all of us who'd intend to vote, in opting to retain membership. However, you see a need to make the case nonetheless.

Because you've run out of other, more pertinent, material to advance your pro-EU agenda ?

Can we look forward to increasingly fringe defences as time goes on .. ?
 

... OK. Now, you're arguing to all of us that we need to remain in the EU because, according to you, the EU is 'gay friendly'.

Somehow I don't see that as being the deciding factor, amongst all of us who'd intend to vote, in opting to retain membership. However, you see a need to make the case nonetheless.

Because you've run out of other, more pertinent, material to advance your pro-EU agenda ?

Can we look forward to increasingly fringe defences as time goes on .. ?
Human rights are a big issue apparently. Not just in the UK. Look at prospective countries like Turkey. Think of the positive changes in that country when they have to raise their standards.
 

... OK. Now, you're arguing to all of us that we need to remain in the EU because, according to you, the EU is 'gay friendly'.

Somehow I don't see that as being the deciding factor, amongst all of us who'd intend to vote, in opting to retain membership. However, you see a need to make the case nonetheless.

Because you've run out of other, more pertinent, material to advance your pro-EU agenda ?

Can we look forward to increasingly fringe defences as time goes on .. ?
Human rights are a big issue apparently. Not just in the UK. Look at prospective countries like Turkey. Think of the positive changes in that country when they have to raise their standards.

'HAVE TO
' ... you say ... thank you, Tommy ... that one's a gift !

What have we, on the 'anti' side, been saying all along about the EU's control freakery, their overriding desire to dominate their Member States ?? Now, it turns out that you openly recognise, even celebrate the fact, that there's truth to what we have been saying.

You can argue all you like about the 'correctness' involved. BUT, the central principle remains .. one of a power-bloc determined to exert its influence, as it sees fit, upon the States within its orbit.

It only remains for you, Tommy, to show us all how it is that we're unfit for autonomy in our part of the world, how we MUST accept domination of our affairs by a foreign power !

So go to it. Show us our unfitness to run our own affairs, tend to our OWN business in our OWN way.
 







How do you work that out when violent criminals are being given their freedom under the EU human rights laws. Unless you are a coloured gay mass murderer you have no human rights in this country

Actually ... I believe I'm right in saying that 'a right to a family life' is considered a human right the EU courts have considerable respect for. And ... they even apply that to terrorists, fighting extradition proceedings, from which they can expect justice. Have a terrorist argue that his right to family life will be ruined thanks to successful extradition, and EVEN the TERRORIST will receive a judgement in his favour ...
 
Comments from David Vance:

In Alice in Wonderland, we are invited to believe six impossible things before breakfast. These days, that is not enough.

Compare these two statements if you will;

Here's the Prime Minister:

**We care about our national security. Europe helps us make Britain safer. Through the European Arrest Warrant, we have removed over 7,000 suspected criminals. Every day, our countries monitor terror suspects across the continent.**

He insists that being in the EU makes us safer. Clear?

Then consider this:

**Terrorists are more likely to attack European countries as a result of a controversial deal to allow Turkish citizens to travel across the continent without visas, EU leaders have admitted. Foreign terrorists and organised criminals are “expected” to seek Turkish passports to reach continental Europe “as soon as” the visa waiver program comes into force, a European Commission report said.**

So, the EU tells us that being part of a political union that allows Turkey visa free travel to the EU increases the risk of terrorism. More Charlie Hebdo. More Bataclan. More Brussels airport and underground? More carnage. More loss of life. More terror.

It seems to me that David Cameron has got to the point where he no longer cares to distinguish between truth and deceit, if he ever did.
 







How do you work that out when violent criminals are being given their freedom under the EU human rights laws. Unless you are a coloured gay mass murderer you have no human rights in this country

Actually ... I believe I'm right in saying that 'a right to a family life' is considered a human right the EU courts have considerable respect for. And ... they even apply that to terrorists, fighting extradition proceedings, from which they can expect justice. Have a terrorist argue that his right to family life will be ruined thanks to successful extradition, and EVEN the TERRORIST will receive a judgement in his favour ...






With no thoughts or concerns regarding his victims rights to a family life. The simple answer is once a person commits a crime they lose the same human rights they have taken away from their victims. So all terrorists will be either executed or sent home to be executed
 
Comments from David Vance:

In Alice in Wonderland, we are invited to believe six impossible things before breakfast. These days, that is not enough.

Compare these two statements if you will;

Here's the Prime Minister:

**We care about our national security. Europe helps us make Britain safer. Through the European Arrest Warrant, we have removed over 7,000 suspected criminals. Every day, our countries monitor terror suspects across the continent.**

He insists that being in the EU makes us safer. Clear?

Then consider this:

**Terrorists are more likely to attack European countries as a result of a controversial deal to allow Turkish citizens to travel across the continent without visas, EU leaders have admitted. Foreign terrorists and organised criminals are “expected” to seek Turkish passports to reach continental Europe “as soon as” the visa waiver program comes into force, a European Commission report said.**

So, the EU tells us that being part of a political union that allows Turkey visa free travel to the EU increases the risk of terrorism. More Charlie Hebdo. More Bataclan. More Brussels airport and underground? More carnage. More loss of life. More terror.

It seems to me that David Cameron has got to the point where he no longer cares to distinguish between truth and deceit, if he ever did.

I hope British people will show wisdom by voting to exit from EU.
 







How do you work that out when violent criminals are being given their freedom under the EU human rights laws. Unless you are a coloured gay mass murderer you have no human rights in this country

Actually ... I believe I'm right in saying that 'a right to a family life' is considered a human right the EU courts have considerable respect for. And ... they even apply that to terrorists, fighting extradition proceedings, from which they can expect justice. Have a terrorist argue that his right to family life will be ruined thanks to successful extradition, and EVEN the TERRORIST will receive a judgement in his favour ...
The laws that protect the guilty also protect us. You cant pick and choose who will be protected under the law.
Thats pretty fundamental.
 







How do you work that out when violent criminals are being given their freedom under the EU human rights laws. Unless you are a coloured gay mass murderer you have no human rights in this country

Actually ... I believe I'm right in saying that 'a right to a family life' is considered a human right the EU courts have considerable respect for. And ... they even apply that to terrorists, fighting extradition proceedings, from which they can expect justice. Have a terrorist argue that his right to family life will be ruined thanks to successful extradition, and EVEN the TERRORIST will receive a judgement in his favour ...
The laws that protect the guilty also protect us. You cant pick and choose who will be protected under the law.
Thats pretty fundamental.






BULLSHIT and you know it.

The law only works for those who the looney left defend and support, as they are the ones they need to entice into their fold. So this means muslims, rapists, murderers, violent criminals etc., the people that claim they have ties to the UK because they have a cat.

I have claimed that allowing violent foreign criminals to live in the UK is a breach of my human rights and get told that their human rights come before mine as they face harsh punishments if they are deported.
 







How do you work that out when violent criminals are being given their freedom under the EU human rights laws. Unless you are a coloured gay mass murderer you have no human rights in this country

Actually ... I believe I'm right in saying that 'a right to a family life' is considered a human right the EU courts have considerable respect for. And ... they even apply that to terrorists, fighting extradition proceedings, from which they can expect justice. Have a terrorist argue that his right to family life will be ruined thanks to successful extradition, and EVEN the TERRORIST will receive a judgement in his favour ...
The laws that protect the guilty also protect us. You cant pick and choose who will be protected under the law.
Thats pretty fundamental.






BULLSHIT and you know it.

The law only works for those who the looney left defend and support, as they are the ones they need to entice into their fold. So this means muslims, rapists, murderers, violent criminals etc., the people that claim they have ties to the UK because they have a cat.

I have claimed that allowing violent foreign criminals to live in the UK is a breach of my human rights and get told that their human rights come before mine as they face harsh punishments if they are deported.
So.................our legal system is only respectful of the rights of "looney left" followers ?

You have surpassed yourself today.
 
Why all this agra? Just leave the EU, the EU will be far better for it.

What would you know about it?

All your statements being based on personal animosity and bile.

I don't think you quite understand. I just think it is better for the EU, that the UK leave. I posted this on another thread.

"I do not hope that the UK will be fucked when they leave the EU. I wish the best for them. I just think the EU will be far better off without the UK. The other big countries want more integration as was the plan when the Treaty of Rome was signed. The UK was allowed to join the EEC with misgivings on the part of France, and they were right. Germany and Italy the other two big countries of the EEC were wrong to force France to accept UK membership. They thought that France's feeling that the UK would become a U.S. Trojan Horse that would weaken the EU and its eventual integration was unfounded. They were wrong. I think that the UK should be grateful that the EU allowed them to progress economically, they were a basket case when they joined with both France and Italy as well as Germany being far wealthier countries. The EEC/EU allowed them to leapfrog France and Italy, good for them. Let them go it alone and let the EU integrate."
 
EU is not a sustainable idea and I have said this long time ago. I hope Brits will vote to exit from EU. After Brits, I think French will bail out next. Then, it will be hard for Germans to stay in. After Germans bail out, EU will be useless.
 







How do you work that out when violent criminals are being given their freedom under the EU human rights laws. Unless you are a coloured gay mass murderer you have no human rights in this country

Actually ... I believe I'm right in saying that 'a right to a family life' is considered a human right the EU courts have considerable respect for. And ... they even apply that to terrorists, fighting extradition proceedings, from which they can expect justice. Have a terrorist argue that his right to family life will be ruined thanks to successful extradition, and EVEN the TERRORIST will receive a judgement in his favour ...
The laws that protect the guilty also protect us. You cant pick and choose who will be protected under the law.
Thats pretty fundamental.

How's this for a self-defeating argument ??

Laws protecting 'the guilty', are surely bad laws, and those who implement them are complicit in the consequences.

The solution is one of reform, to make that phenomenon as unlikely to happen as possible. I'm fully behind that .. aren't you ?

See a terrorist given the chance to settle in the UK because of one such bad law. That individual is a permanent threat to the innocent. Very possibly a deadly one. This, Tommy, CANNOT be acceptable.

The point of laws is to protect people, to serve their interests ... not to facilitate an enhanced chance of harm !!!!
 







How do you work that out when violent criminals are being given their freedom under the EU human rights laws. Unless you are a coloured gay mass murderer you have no human rights in this country

Actually ... I believe I'm right in saying that 'a right to a family life' is considered a human right the EU courts have considerable respect for. And ... they even apply that to terrorists, fighting extradition proceedings, from which they can expect justice. Have a terrorist argue that his right to family life will be ruined thanks to successful extradition, and EVEN the TERRORIST will receive a judgement in his favour ...
The laws that protect the guilty also protect us. You cant pick and choose who will be protected under the law.
Thats pretty fundamental.

How's this for a self-defeating argument ??

Laws protecting 'the guilty', are surely bad laws, and those who implement them are complicit in the consequences.

The solution is one of reform, to make that phenomenon as unlikely to happen as possible. I'm fully behind that .. aren't you ?

See a terrorist given the chance to settle in the UK because of one such bad law. That individual is a permanent threat to the innocent. Very possibly a deadly one. This, Tommy, CANNOT be acceptable.

The point of laws is to protect people, to serve their interests ... not to facilitate an enhanced chance of harm !!!!
Laws protect all of us not just "the guilty".

I can see that sometimes this is frustrating but it is a necessary state of affairs.

As an example the government got worked up because they couldnt deport a suspected terrorist.

Why ?

Because we dont deport people to countries that practice torture.

I dont believe that anybody could argue against that law.It is a good law that protects all of us and discourages states from using torture.

Of course some bad people will also be protected by this law but thats just the way it has to be.

I wouldnt like to be tortured would you ?
 







How do you work that out when violent criminals are being given their freedom under the EU human rights laws. Unless you are a coloured gay mass murderer you have no human rights in this country

Actually ... I believe I'm right in saying that 'a right to a family life' is considered a human right the EU courts have considerable respect for. And ... they even apply that to terrorists, fighting extradition proceedings, from which they can expect justice. Have a terrorist argue that his right to family life will be ruined thanks to successful extradition, and EVEN the TERRORIST will receive a judgement in his favour ...
The laws that protect the guilty also protect us. You cant pick and choose who will be protected under the law.
Thats pretty fundamental.






BULLSHIT and you know it.

The law only works for those who the looney left defend and support, as they are the ones they need to entice into their fold. So this means muslims, rapists, murderers, violent criminals etc., the people that claim they have ties to the UK because they have a cat.

I have claimed that allowing violent foreign criminals to live in the UK is a breach of my human rights and get told that their human rights come before mine as they face harsh punishments if they are deported.
So.................our legal system is only respectful of the rights of "looney left" followers ?

You have surpassed yourself today.






They ran it for 14 years and had a way of making the police do what they wanted. Tar them as racists and watch them bend over backwards. The word was overused and abused so much that now it has no impact and the police are starting to arrest ethnic minorities.
You really need to learn to read as I did not say looney left followers did I, I said those the looney left support and defend. As in the muslims who happen to be the largest ethnic minority and will vote Labour
 







How do you work that out when violent criminals are being given their freedom under the EU human rights laws. Unless you are a coloured gay mass murderer you have no human rights in this country

Actually ... I believe I'm right in saying that 'a right to a family life' is considered a human right the EU courts have considerable respect for. And ... they even apply that to terrorists, fighting extradition proceedings, from which they can expect justice. Have a terrorist argue that his right to family life will be ruined thanks to successful extradition, and EVEN the TERRORIST will receive a judgement in his favour ...
The laws that protect the guilty also protect us. You cant pick and choose who will be protected under the law.
Thats pretty fundamental.

How's this for a self-defeating argument ??

Laws protecting 'the guilty', are surely bad laws, and those who implement them are complicit in the consequences.

The solution is one of reform, to make that phenomenon as unlikely to happen as possible. I'm fully behind that .. aren't you ?

See a terrorist given the chance to settle in the UK because of one such bad law. That individual is a permanent threat to the innocent. Very possibly a deadly one. This, Tommy, CANNOT be acceptable.

The point of laws is to protect people, to serve their interests ... not to facilitate an enhanced chance of harm !!!!
Laws protect all of us not just "the guilty".

I can see that sometimes this is frustrating but it is a necessary state of affairs.

As an example the government got worked up because they couldnt deport a suspected terrorist.

Why ?

Because we dont deport people to countries that practice torture.

I dont believe that anybody could argue against that law.It is a good law that protects all of us and discourages states from using torture.

Of course some bad people will also be protected by this law but thats just the way it has to be.

I wouldnt like to be tortured would you ?





Which should not matter if that person has committed a crime in this country. Far too many know they will get away with their criminal activities under the ECHR rulings, this is why France and Germany have a policy of deportation at point of crime, and then the criminals have to pay for their own appeals. Very few appeals in mainland European nations, but the Labour champagne socialists gave away our rights to do the same thing

What you ignore is that hundreds of thousands of people in this country are being tortured by the very people you are defending and supporting every day. But that is alright in your eyes as they are not being tortured in return, instead they are mollycoddled and lauded as princes and saints.
 

Forum List

Back
Top