ARmy Rumour SErvice

I still say they should sod off, particularly in cases like this.

There's enough injustice done in the name of human rights to make me wonder whether it is universal, or just for those who want to use it as a tool to hide their crimes under while they bleat about how, after killing a load of people, some nasty man shouted at them and made them all hurty.

Originally Posted by MagratM

I still say they should sod off, particularly in cases like this.

There's enough injustice done in the name of human rights to make me wonder whether it is universal, or just for those who want to use it as a tool to hide their crimes under while they bleat about how, after killing a load of people, some nasty man shouted at them and made them all hurty.

Like it or lump it mate, those accused and indeed convicted of some utterly appalling crimes (I'll use Ian Huntley as an example) have to be afforded rights and protections; mark of a civilised society, and all that.

Or, are you advocating that we simply let mob justice prevail, have them ripped to bits in the street, and we wind the clock back 300 years??

Not at all. I do, however advocate a return of a life sentence being a life sentence, and prisons being places of punishment and incarceration- a deterrent to further crime rather than a lifestyle better than mine. Three meals a day, yep, but the gym, pool tables, televisions and all that jazz can go. If they want exercise, there should be chain gangs.

I'm just pissed off with criminals getting all weepy about their human rights when they really can't be arsed about anyone else's.

Originally Posted by BiscuitsAB

And in todays news Taliban de-head 16 people at a party for dancing to music! And the torygraph thinks these fuckers deserve the same rights a decent human beings?

Any taliban captured should be shot in the head and their corpses passed through an industrial mincer and fed to the fishes. (no burial = no virgins)

Yes, I read about these bastards killing people for enjoying music. I would love to find them and drop them off at an X-Factor/Gangsta Rap/Elton john gig where they can do something a bit more useful.

Originally Posted by lsquared

That is precisely my sort of moderate post! 100% agreed with.

With one pig's penis up the arse and another down the throat, and sewn up in a pigskin, there will be no place in Heaven and no virgins.

Originally Posted by MagratM

Not at all. I do, however advocate a return of a life sentence being a life sentence, and prisons being places of punishment and incarceration- a deterrent to further crime rather than a lifestyle better than mine. Three meals a day, yep, but the gym, pool tables, televisions and all that jazz can go. If they want exercise, there should be chain gangs.

I'm just pissed off with criminals getting all weepy about their human rights when they really can't be arsed about anyone else's.

Yup, I'd go with that. I don't entirely buy the "Prisons are for rehabilitation and not punishment" argument entirely, and I abhor the concept of "Sentenced to 20 yrs, serve 10" concept brought in under the last Govt as an economy measure for prison places. That said, whilst prisoners are in custody, they are the responsibility of the state and have rights (which, damn shame, the prison staff didn't honour on the day in question - I'm sure they'll get over it). Now I didn't even stifle a snigger when I read some con had got to Ian Huntley with a shank - Ian Huntley sues prison service for £100,000 after razor attack | UK news | The Guardian - but he has a right to protection from violence.

But the fact that they can't be arsed about other people's right's doesn't negate their own.

It would be interesting to see how many cases would be heard, at length, if the legal aid was capped at say £10,000. Would the likes of Mr Shiner be happy to trawl the world for cases?

I will admit, I have no idea as to wether the legal aid lawyers do it out of a sense of 'Justice for all.' or if it is easy money. But I do note that Matrix chambers seem to make a large amount out of the taxpayer's cash, based on legislation that was created by Mr Blair's government, with the best intentions no doubt, just lucky the prime minister's wife was in the right place at the right time. God forbid a tory bunch of corrupt ne'er do wells should try the same trick.

Originally Posted by Pyianno

Al-Qaeda terrorists launch human rights bid - Telegraph

Moaning like bitches about terrorists appealing to the ECHR on a point of fact rather than a point of law.

Then revealing toward the end of the article that the characteristic instrument of the despot, the Public Interest Immunity Certificate, was issued by HMG to prevent the trial and appeal courts from even seeing the evidence which might support the terrorists' contention that the evidence used against them was adduced under torture.

What a total farce "justice" in this country has become. Note the common law principle that PII certificates must be accepted by judges at face value - i.e. the basis of their being issued must not be probed.

(edit) - the things once learns. Seemingly said common law principle was overturned by the House of Lords.

Fuck off, you tool. They were convicted ONLY on evidence obtained in the UK. I don't give a toss how many times the ISS fucked their arses. And your right, you can only appeal to the ECHR on a point of law, not of fact. So, how has this complete waste of taxpayers money, in support of convicted terrorists ever seen the light of day?