Thread: The EU rules on compensation---for Pirates

Originally Posted by quimbian corholla

Originally Posted by piwanoi

Thanks to Tony B liars insane 1998 "Human rights" act

From your link:

The content of the Human Right Act 1998

The Human Rights Act 1998 came into force in October 2000. It includes a number of fundamental rights and freedoms that all UK citizens can now enjoy. Examples of the rights protected by the Human Rights Act 1998, include:

Right to life
Right to freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment
Right to liberty and security
Right to freedom from slavery and forced labour
Right to a fair trial
Right to respect for your private and family life, home and correspondence
Right to freedom of thought, belief and religion
Right to freedom of expression
Right to freedom of assembly and association
Right to marry and start a family
Right to peaceful enjoyment of your property
Right to education
Right to participate in free elections

IT'S MADNESS I TELL YA!

I find it hard to see why a UKIP person would be against this:

The main difference is that the Human Rights Act 1998 allows human rights cases to be tried in UK courts, whereas previously complainants had to take their case to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

The Human Rights Act applies to all public bodies in the UK, and any other organisation performing a public function. Thus it is possible to bring a legal action in a UK court against your employer, your local council, a school or hospital, if you believe your human rights have been breached.

Piwi, are you arguing that the EU court should have precedence over a UK court?

You do realise that it is not like nobody could bring a case before but now suddenly they can right?

What it is is that before any case would have gone straight to Strasbourg but now it will go to a UK court instead. Isn't that sort of thing generally what the UKIP wants?

So you think that Tonys Human rights act in 1998 was a good idea then? the very act he tried to water down in 2006 realising what a king sized clanger he had dropped?

Hey QC ,read this article just one of dozens that says Tony B liars 1998 human rights act was lunacy ,read on ,Britain: Blair pledges to override Human Rights Act - World Socialist Web Site

Hey QC Just another nail in B lairs human rights coffin ,realising he had dropped one huge bollock he tried in vain to change his own insane act ,of course if you think that B liar had it all wrong and his act of supreme folly 1998 was a good idea and did not need altering down by all means say so ,looking forward to your usual blustering all round the house's non answer to my simple question in my post #26 BBC NEWS | UK | Blair 'to amend human rights law'

Originally Posted by piwanoi

Originally Posted by quimbian corholla

Originally Posted by piwanoi

Thanks to Tony B liars insane 1998 "Human rights" act

From your link:

The content of the Human Right Act 1998

The Human Rights Act 1998 came into force in October 2000. It includes a number of fundamental rights and freedoms that all UK citizens can now enjoy. Examples of the rights protected by the Human Rights Act 1998, include:

Right to life
Right to freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment
Right to liberty and security
Right to freedom from slavery and forced labour
Right to a fair trial
Right to respect for your private and family life, home and correspondence
Right to freedom of thought, belief and religion
Right to freedom of expression
Right to freedom of assembly and association
Right to marry and start a family
Right to peaceful enjoyment of your property
Right to education
Right to participate in free elections

IT'S MADNESS I TELL YA!

I find it hard to see why a UKIP person would be against this:

The main difference is that the Human Rights Act 1998 allows human rights cases to be tried in UK courts, whereas previously complainants had to take their case to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

The Human Rights Act applies to all public bodies in the UK, and any other organisation performing a public function. Thus it is possible to bring a legal action in a UK court against your employer, your local council, a school or hospital, if you believe your human rights have been breached.

Piwi, are you arguing that the EU court should have precedence over a UK court?

You do realise that it is not like nobody could bring a case before but now suddenly they can right?

What it is is that before any case would have gone straight to Strasbourg but now it will go to a UK court instead. Isn't that sort of thing generally what the UKIP wants?

So you think that Tonys Human rights act in 1998 was a good idea then? the very act he tried to water down in 2006 realising what a king sized clanger he had dropped?

Good Lord, QC. You don't actually think Piwi has read the Human Rights Act 1998 do you?

All he reads is article headlines and the headlines from Google searches such as "Jihad+"Watch", B+Liar+Europe+Bollox", "Labour+bastards", and "rightwing+bigots+love-em-all".

Originally Posted by Neverna

Good Lord, QC. You don't actually think Piwi has read the Human Rights Act 1998 do you?

Since it seems to have become his latest bête noire I hoped he'd at least have a passing familiarity with what he's railing against.

Silly me.

Originally Posted by quimbian corholla

Originally Posted by Neverna

Good Lord, QC. You don't actually think Piwi has read the Human Rights Act 1998 do you?

Since it seems to have become his latest bête noire I hoped he'd at least have a passing familiarity with what he's railing against.

Silly me.

At the second time of asking the simple question to my post #26 do you think that Blair's 1998 human rights act was a good idea? ,when he himself tried to water it down down in 2006 knowing full well he had opened a can of worms he could not contain ,plus both labour party home secretary,s Jack Straw and John Reid said it was sheer lunacy and fought it tooth and nail in the courts only to lose .,in essence all I am doing is agreeing with them ,of course if you think you know better and that it was a good idea please by all means just come out and say so ,instead of fucking about without coming out with a definitive answer ,you really are a fucking excuse making joke

Just another sad story on how the labour Government was hogtied to deal with criminals thanks to Bliars insane human rights act of course if you disagree with Home secretary Jon Reid and our Tony himself who

Originally Posted by piwanoi

Just another sad story on how the labour Government was hogtied to deal with criminals thanks to Bliars insane human rights act of course if you disagree with Home secretary John Reid and our Tony himself who

was regretting he had ever gone down this road to political insanity which I agreed with ,please by all means say so Reid appeals against Afghan hijack ruling | UK news | The Guardian

Originally Posted by quimbian corholla

Originally Posted by Neverna

Good Lord, QC. You don't actually think Piwi has read the Human Rights Act 1998 do you?

Since it seems to have become his latest bête noire I hoped he'd at least have a passing familiarity with what he's railing against.

Silly me.

Its fuck all to do with reading the human rights act, its just the same as Former Home secatary Jack Straw says, it,s how it interpreted ,and in real life it was a fucking disaster Jack Straw plans to 'rebalance' Human Rights Act | Politics | theguardian.com of course Straw's words to be completly ignored as you know better

https://thepiratebay.mg/torrent/9456...ptain_Philips_[2013]BRRip_XviD[AC3]-SaM[ETRG]

Originally Posted by KEVIN2008

https://thepiratebay.mg/torrent/9456...ptain_Philips_[2013]BRRip_XviD[AC3]-SaM[ETRG]

Yes...
Just like Hollywood, heh?

Piwanoi still hasn't said exactly what he dislikes about the HRA 1998. Typical troll. He rails against it but knows FA about it. I guess it contains too many words with more than 2 syllables.

Originally Posted by kmart

Traditional methods of pirate punishment such as "marooning", "Keel-hauling", "A taste of the cat" and "walking the plank" ought to be meted out to these scurvy varlots.

Those meddling landlubbers at the EU should keep their oars out of it. Rrrrrrrrrrrrr

Marooning? keel hauling?,taste of the cat? and walking the plank ? I'm in amazement ,why is it that some left wing twat like Neo or Begbie out there not saying that this subject is in the wrong category and should be in speakers corner?is it any wonder why these wankers cause me to fall on the floor laughing

Originally Posted by piwanoi

Originally Posted by quimbian corholla

Originally Posted by Neverna

Good Lord, QC. You don't actually think Piwi has read the Human Rights Act 1998 do you?

Since it seems to have become his latest bête noire I hoped he'd at least have a passing familiarity with what he's railing against.

Silly me.

At the second time of asking the simple question to my post #26 do you think that Blair's 1998 human rights act was a good idea? ,when he himself tried to water it down down in 2006 knowing full well he had opened a can of worms he could not contain ,plus both labour party home secretary,s Jack Straw and John Reid said it was sheer lunacy and fought it tooth and nail in the courts only to lose .,in essence all I am doing is agreeing with them ,of course if you think you know better and that it was a good idea please by all means just come out and say so ,instead of fucking about without coming out with a definitive answer ,you really are a fucking excuse making joke

Still waiting for an answer

Originally Posted by piwanoi

Originally Posted by piwanoi

Originally Posted by quimbian corholla

Originally Posted by Neverna

Good Lord, QC. You don't actually think Piwi has read the Human Rights Act 1998 do you?

Since it seems to have become his latest bête noire I hoped he'd at least have a passing familiarity with what he's railing against.

Silly me.

At the second time of asking the simple question to my post #26 do you think that Blair's 1998 human rights act was a good idea? ,when he himself tried to water it down down in 2006 knowing full well he had opened a can of worms he could not contain ,plus both labour party home secretary,s Jack Straw and John Reid said it was sheer lunacy and fought it tooth and nail in the courts only to lose .,in essence all I am doing is agreeing with them ,of course if you think you know better and that it was a good idea please by all means just come out and say so ,instead of fucking about without coming out with a definitive answer ,you really are a fucking excuse making joke

Still waiting for an answer

To my post 26 and of course John Reid the former labour Home Sec said quite clearly that Blairs human rights act needed changing , do you agree?Reid: We'll change human rights laws to fight terrorism | UK | News | Daily Express

Of course if you do not want to answer you can always appeal to the mods and say that this thread should be in Speakers Corner, thus silencing me from asking questions which cause a certain amount of unease ,I see its quite fashionable with certain left wing plonkers on these boards

^ It's more likely to end up in the Dog House.