Free Speech

[captain cojones]

ahh right, so the uk lets in a convicted terrorist and affords him more than full protection including a house over his head that other uk tax payers can only dream of.

If the UK chooses to do that....Who but them are to blame?

 

What has that got to do with the thread subject of "free speech" though??

[robtherake]

Barry's point is valid. Not only is the terrorist permitted to say what he jolly well likes, but despite the fact that he does overstep the boundaries there doesn't seem to be any sensible way of dealing with the bounder, and it's hardly sending out a clear message when not only can we not eject this man, but to add insult to injury he's provided with luxuries denied to law-abiding, decent folk.

[Andrew]

I have nothing but revulsion for this horrible hate mongering terrorist.

He has contributed nothing to this country, whilst good honest people are being subject to all manner of cutbacks, then i see this piece of utter scum and what he is costing this country.

So long as he and his very expensive QC plays the human rights card we will not see the back of him.

[Worms]

From your own link..

Quote

In practice, the right to freedom of speech is not absolute in any country and the right is commonly subject to limitations..

Unquote

 

What Nick wrote is undeniably true. It is clear however that many still do not understand the subject despite his efforts on many posts to put it in as clear a way as possible.

 

Judges quote from the original article

District Judge Tim Pattinson told her: "It is difficult to think of a clearer example of disorderly behaviour than to climb or attempt to climb a barrier at a highly security-sensitive public occasion."

Unquote

 

Bearing in mind the two quotes from above, she was convicted. Having "freedom of speech"... Isn't a blank cheque to say whatever you want whenever you want, it always has to fit within boundaries set out by the laws of the country in which the event occurs.

Oddly enough that link was nothing to do with me...don't know where it came from. I was referring to this:

 

"Article 10 provides the right to freedom of expression, subject to certain restrictions that are "in accordance with law" and "necessary in a democratic society". This right includes the freedom to hold opinions, and to receive and impart information and ideas, but allows restrictions for:

• interests of national security
• territorial integrity or public safety
• prevention of disorder or crime
• protection of health or morals
• protection of the reputation or the rights of others
• preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence
• maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary"

What Nick wrote is not "undeniably true" as I said yesterday, the UK Govt. can change the laws they desire and it does not have to fit in with the ECHR!

[nick]

Oddly enough that link was nothing to do with me...don't know where it came from. I was referring to this:

 

"Article 10 provides the right to freedom of expression, subject to certain restrictions that are "in accordance with law" and "necessary in a democratic society". This right includes the freedom to hold opinions, and to receive and impart information and ideas, but allows restrictions for:

• interests of national security
• territorial integrity or public safety
• prevention of disorder or crime
• protection of health or morals
• protection of the reputation or the rights of others
• preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence
• maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary"

What Nick wrote is not "undeniably true" as I said yesterday, the UK Govt. can change the laws they desire and it does not have to fit in with the ECHR!

 

The UK government cannot ever change any laws, that is a power solely reserved to Parliament, see you were not taking notice of important facts.

[captain cojones]

the UK Govt. can change the laws they desire

 

No they can´t.

[Andrew]

the UK Govt. can change the laws they desire and it does not have to fit in with the ECHR!

 

Sorry worms, but

The Law Lords can make and break laws, not the government, the government can put forward proposals of law change.

I may be wrong, maybe some legal expert can inform us, there seem to be a few of those around.

[chesters1]

Parliament make laws ,parliament is made up of the government and the opposition and the independants and smaller parties

The gov propose new laws (actually anyone can but withoutba party vote behind it only a. Few get through) ,they may be debated (the gov decides how much time there is hense only a few of labours terrorism bill was debated) and then parliament passes it onto the lords. The lords get involved and return the bill or challenge it but nowadays parliament can force things through if it wishes ,their could be ammendments made by parliament or the lords .

It then goes to a vote if it gets a majority it becomes law.

 

Take a peek at the parlianmet channel you will be surprised how few mps actually turn up for a debate and most laws are put through with little scrutiny ,if the proposed law is contention (or more probably for point scoring) the place fills up for the vote but generally its a handfull of mp,s voting.

 

As i said the gov decide how long it is before it passes onto the lords and hundreds of laws never get debated and hundreds go through with amendments that are only seen after the vote ,its not the democratic place you think it is

The proposed bills get discussed 3? Times the first time its just a general vote ,then it gets attention but most get no more than a nod and they go ahead

Edited March 30, 2013 by chesters1

[Andrew]

I've seen them sitting in their chairs snoring or texting, or using their laptops. They should be banned from entering the house with such things.

[chesters1]

Tweeting their mistresses or seeing if the last backhander went into the offshore account i expect

You wont see the poor hard worked buggers i think their time off for easter goes from 28th? Of march to 15th? April

Edited March 30, 2013 by chesters1