To an extent yes, I think if you commit a crime then you should forfeit a great many of your human rights. With human rights come social responsibilities.
racism in england is very serious, but tis all under cover, deep down alot of people have their racist views, but only air them behind closed doors. i have polish tenants living in one of my houses at the moment, and they claim benefit to pay my rent, and they only came to this country like 6 months ago, i know people been here for 40 years and never claimed any benefit! in one of my other houses i have a small family from Bangladesh, the man works in the city the women is a teacher's assistant and they pay me rent in cash, which is quite a hefty amount for a family who have just come into the country. but he says no matter what country he living in he wud like to live with dignity, and for as long as he can work he will never claim benefits. but i remember about 15 years ago the asians were killing the benefits system, cklaiming all types of benefits, i think the Pakistani are notorious for benefit fraud, lol so if people hate them for that you cant blame them
If that’s what you want then I guess you will never be happy with the way things are run. Not allowing criminals their basic human rights is absurd and completely out of touch with reality. Witholding 'some' human rights is equally absurd. Guantanamo Bay is an example of such policies. If you are not happy with the state of affairs then you need to at least suggest alternatives that are slightly connected with the real world and have a chance of being implemented.
Basic human rights are fine, (food, shelter etc) that's the way it's always been. But things are swinging too far the other way now. There's actually a case at the moment by a prisoner who is demanding their own toilet rather than sharing with others. Prisoners are already (and have been for a long time) denied basic 'human' rights such as being able to vote. Why should other rights and responsibilities be any different.
People are imprisoned as a punishment for committing a crime. Instead of releasing them maybe you would prefer if they were locked up for good? This way they get 'some' human rights. Back your sweeping suggestions up with some practical suggestions. Which human rights should be withdrawn?
No, release them when they're due to be released. They've paid their debt to society by then and should be allowed to do as they please. Like I said, I don't see anything wrong with how the prison system has been for the last 50 years. Prisoners demanding 'rights' to TVs, Playstions, en-Suite toiltes and porn mags is PC bullshit IMO.
We are going off topic I was refering to the Afghan/Hijackers situation really. Prisoners don't get things because they demand them they get things because the Government gives it to them. Its actually very cruel to lock people up without any mental stimulation - they would develop mental problems and will find it hard to readjust to life when they are released. I take it you don't no anybody that has been jailed. You wouldn't want them to be locked up in a room for 23 hours with no mental stimulation, would you? I think I know who you are reffering to with the toilet demanding prisoner.
Exactly, the sooner the human rights act is torn up the better. I agree, prisoners should be given stimulation, some form of community service or practical eduation though rather than Playstation and X-Box. Actually yes, one of my good friends was jailed for 6 months.
Just a note. I recently watched some arabic news channels, and i was utterly shocked at how racist they were. To be frank, Mongolia from what i have heard is the worst place for racism these days. Over there they would turn the radio on listening to Mr Bush and his speech, and they would edit the radio so that they didnt hear all the positives about America making them and their country the best country in the world according to the people who live in them. And when my teacher, who is white, went there, she was actually spat at in the streets. I personally believe that why is the government of the UK giving into immigrants demands? We offically now have one of the most densely population countrys in the world, services are at a all time low, i have to wait 4 months for a small operation (not important nor needed) on the NHS (National Health Service) or i will have to go private which would cost me money. Unfortunatly, i also think that it is unfair that whites are unfair to blacks because of the color of their skin. From what i have seen, black people seem more intelligent and they seem to work harder than us white and they are probably more important economically to the world. So... All i have to say is to stop being racist altogether. It is pointless. I am not talking to one or the other, i am talking to BOTH sides. You are BOTH in the wrong and why CANT we just get along? I would rather die than be ignorant. I am only 15. I like everyone. Everyone should like everyone. Racism should be in the past. Multi-cultural societys living together is what i want and what the world needs. If racism is over, surely terrorism will be in the past too? Then we can focus on Global Warming and recycling and saving the planet.
International law states that you MUSt declare yourself an asylum seeker at the earliest opportunity. This is why we are able to send back people to \France if that is the country they have come through to get to the UK. In so far as you were saying they were given a fair tryial. All I can say to that is CRAP. They appealed under that damned human rights law and were released because they 'acted under duress'. So apparently now it is OK to hijack a plane fly it half way around the world. Fail to declare yourself asylum seekers when you land, hold 300 men women and children in fear of their lives. But HEY it is ok, because they acted under duress! Do you have any idea how much of a precident this crock of SH*t has set? The moment they did what they did, they signed away their rights IMO. Why hold these people hostage? Why not land elsewhere? Why not give themselves up immediately on landing? Why negotiate for money and refuelling? Cmon PLEASE take the doo gooder rose coloured spectacles off and see this for what it is. An attempt to demand money gone wrong and the exploitation of our ridiculous laws.
FACT: These hijackers entered the country illegally. (as far as I know there is no such thing as legal hijacking of a plane) FACT: They put the lives of the passengers at risk FACT: we have to pay for the priviledge of having this scum in our society FACT: They crossed many friendly countries to get here FACT: they failed to declare asylum at the earliest opportunity But apparently NONE of the above matters because they were acting under duress. So what human rights do these people deserve here? Because I tell you one thing, I hope to God they do not get put under duress in this country because Lord knows what they might do. But then again it is ok because bles em they couldn't help it. Tony Martin the guy I mentioned in this or another thread Had been burgled over 60 times before he snapped. But was he released because of dures? NO why? Skin colour plain and simple. Tony Martin was white, these people are Middle Eastern Muslims, and currently people are bending over backwards not to cause offence to the racial minorities. I had to house my mother in law because she is suffering from dementure. I tried to get local authority help and was told there is a long waiting list. BUT when I complained and pointed out the fact that this woman has worked all her life and paid taxes, I was bluntly told. And there is your problem. If she was a black Muslim lesbian we would re-house her immediately, probably put her up in a privately rented house with a full time carer and social worker. And THAT was directly from a local authority employee.
Again, I don't know the FULL details of the case so I can't really say either way. It does sound like a loop hole has been identified. But there is always more to story than we read in a 2 page news article, I'd rather not pretend to know the full facts. If I were a juror in the trial I would be able to answer all of your questions. I'm not going to form an opinion without knowing the specific details.
in terms of accepting jews, maybe the US is far better than many EU nations, but racism is still much stronger in the US compared to canada, on a ignorant level..
I am afraid I don't agree with the thread poster. I have spent 2.5 months in germany and never seen any racist behavior either from young people of my age or even their parents who gladly invited me to their homes.
Mistermix, you are VERY good at not answering questions aren't you I think maybe you are a politician because I have asked you maybe 6-10 questions and you have not answered one of them. In fact in the second reply you make the classic 'hide from debate' move of answering questions with questions. As far as I am concerned now there is no point in trying to debate anything with you sadly, because when asked straight questions, you just skirt a reply, or reply with a question. I have to correct a misaprehension you are working under though. A jury DID find them guilty and they WERE jailed. but they appealed under the human rights act because they said they did not get a fair trial because they were under duress from their ordeal. What in gods name does that have to do with anything? another dogem reply
The answer to the questions that you have asked is: I do not know. I have only read a few newspaper articles about the case, I dont know the real facts of the court cases. You can pontificate about particular court cases as much as you like. I prefer to base my opinions on the full facts. I was asking about your voting just out of interest. If you feel in any way that I have dodged any of your questions, please feel free to repost them.
The UK needs a new political party - the Common Sense party. Labour have burnt their bridges, and the Conservatives seemingly have no firm policies. We need someone to come in and cut out all of the crazyness.
You are right there. There is no real vote clenching issue that seperates the parties. At least America has its pro-war and anti-war divisions. I'm half expecting David Cameron to start talking about Britain's 'Gypsy' problem as his main vote winning policy.
I'm gonna have to agree with you there. You guys seem to be much more tolerant and forgiving of terrorists than we are.