The_Mommy Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 ^^ I assumed it wasn't anything to do with my post The Mommy Which one mentioned moderation then ?? Im baffled as to how these mod quotes work ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medusa Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 Which one mentioned moderation then ?? Im baffled as to how these mod quotes work ?? The post questioning moderation has been removed, but the person who posted it will know that the message is for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choogling Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 I would like to know how he will wipe his bum,and brush his teeth in a US prison.? Can't see them allowing him to hang on to his hook hand while locked up. Could get very messy!...And smelly. a wire brush on a long stick would get his arse nice and clean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shane39 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 a wire brush on a long stick would get his arse nice and clean Well if he aint put in solitary confinement,i'm sure his sex-starved cell mate could clean him out(whilst tugging on his scruffy beard) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 No. In my mind an apologist would be someone who can always find reason for people behaving in despicable ways. In what way was I being all frothy? 1. No one has excused him. 2. There is always a reason. If there wasn't, it would be more reason to worry. I take it your interest in legal matters is minimal, as EU law has no bearing on this case. You can take what whatever it is within your power to take, my interest in legal matters is no more than interest, I never advocated any more or less. You on the other hand have advocated yours is more than minimal..therefore educate us rather than point score? I agree on your EU law correction. I am concerned with inequalities of UK and US bias in favour of the US. As you pointed out to MJ Scuba, if the ECHR needs to be rejected then by definition if the Human rights act is written into British law then that should also be equally rejected unless of course it doesn't exactly mirror image the ECHR. Surely the point of arbitration is to question law and its ramifications. Not all laws are just. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 Which one mentioned moderation then ?? Im baffled as to how these mod quotes work ?? If you keep mentioning moderation you'll get the thread closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ sheffield Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 If you keep mentioning moderation you'll get the thread closed. Will you please stop mentioning moderation, you are as bad as mommy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 Will you please stop mentioning moderation, you are as bad as mommy Why what's up with the mods? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andygardener Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 I agree on your EU law correction. I am concerned with inequalities of UK and US bias in favour of the US. As you pointed out to MJ Scuba, if the ECHR needs to be rejected then by definition if the Human rights act is written into British law then that should also be equally rejected unless of course it doesn't exactly mirror image the ECHR. Surely the point of arbitration is to question law and its ramifications. Not all laws are just. The way I see it is the ECHR (convention) is sound, British written and good law. The way the ECHR (court) has interpreted it is self agrandising and has consistently sought to push the boundaries of competence from national courts to themselves. So keep the convention, remove the European Court as arbiter for UK cases and make our Supreme court the ultimate arbiter. We do not need Russian, Serbian or Turkish judges to tell us how to interpret a law we created, as is the case now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penistone999 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 I think its a disgrace. The poor man should be allowed to stay here , in fact we should all buy him a huge house and allow him the freedom of speech to allow him to preach death and terrorism. I thought we had already done that . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.