Thank goodness for the European Courts. An idiot’s idea of “Human rights” that keep armies of parasites at the public trough. And also for useless, craven, UK politicians.
It seems the unelected legislators who make up European court of human rights has decided it is unfair that criminals actually serving time are not allowed to vote. Do any of these judges have cousins who are of course “legitimate businessmen”?
Who brought the case before them? Would you believe it was almost literally... “Heeeeer’s JOHNNNY!!!" A "mad axe murderer” by your average man’s definition, who has been let out? And yes his name really is John and he killed his landlady with a genuine axe and then pleaded guilty to manslaughter with diminished responsibility.
You couldn’t make it up and be believed.
The UK government appears to be actually going along with this piece of insanity. For fear the Human rights industry will hit them with huge claims on behalf of the poor deprived inmates.
We can all imagine the likelihood of the French government going along with that – for about a millisecond!
They would probably simply shrug in that Gallic way and do just as they pleased, as they do over anything else that comes out of the EU that does not suit them. And the EU would do nothing.
So if our pointless politicians do go along with it, presumably the crooks will get to vote in the constituency where they are actually incarcerated, if that’s what they want, it being their place of abode. There are 48,000 of them concentrated in various places
The only exceptions will be those who commit the two truly terrible crimes of non-payment of debts or God forbid - contempt of court..
Presumably they will be able to vote in National, local council elections and parish council elections...
Presumably they will vote for candidates that suit them and as a block, given the way things work.
Cameron was making noises about making the local police chief an elected official.
So how long before local Councils in large prison’s catchment areas are packed with ex and unconvinced criminals. You know.. “legitimate businessmen” like Al Capone, or the Crays..
The question we need to ask ourselves is once what amounts to the mafia are in charge will they prove more effective that the political elite? Will the average citizen be better, or worse, off.
Compare the relative prosperity of Southern and Northern Italy.
One thing you can bet - the dustmen won’t go on strike any time soon - unless they are told to.
Meanwhile how long before the EU Court of Human Rights demands the vote for those they really have so much more in common with than anyone else - the clinically insane...
Wednesday, 3 November 2010
Another brick in the wall?
Cameron and Sarkozy have signed a deal to share military resources. It was kept pretty much off the public’s radar until it was a done deal. Did parliament get any say so?
It seems Cameron has locked the UK into it for the next 50 years. It is not clear if it can be got out of.
It is doubtful if any of the UK’s politicians will ever seriously try.
Cameron is busy trying to spin it up into great news and it is for the pro EU political elite.
It is difficult to reconcile this with his earlier bluster about not signing away any more of the UK’s sovereignty without a referendum. But this will be yet another instance where a slight change in the newspeak name of the thing magically utterly transforms it, so an old promise can be safely ignored and discarded. He is taking a leaf out of Gordon Brown’s book, on the Labour Party electionlies manifesto.
What it actually is is a tacit acknowledgement that thanks to his incompetent butchery of the UK's defence capability the UK is no longer capable of acting effectively on the world stage without support.
What it actually means is that the UK can now no longer act militarily, in many respects, without France’s agreement.
A mutual defence pact is one thing, even military co-operation, or joint expeditionary forces - but signing over a veto on when you use your military to a foreign power is a whole other ball game, more akin to treason.
Not that UK politicians have not been happily signing away sovereign power for decades, so he can reasonably expect the supine UK electorate to put up with that as they have done with so much else that more self respecting citizens would do something about.
Sadly it is probably unlikely there will ever be a tea party movement in the UK.
What is Cameron’s agenda? One suspects ever closer European integration and the construction of a seed of a EU military. How long before a "money saving treaty" with Germany comes along?
Then there is the argument that can now be used by the political elite that If co-operation works in this areas then why not others? They will then subtly suggest, as they so often do, that it will allow ‘Europe’ to be more ‘independent’ of the US.
US politicians still somehow happily seem to imagine the EU is an unmitigated good thing for the US, despite plenty of evidence to the contrary. Is it that they think they know the nature of the beast? It wasn’t so long ago they thought it was a good idea to fund the Taliban...
It seems Cameron has locked the UK into it for the next 50 years. It is not clear if it can be got out of.
It is doubtful if any of the UK’s politicians will ever seriously try.
Cameron is busy trying to spin it up into great news and it is for the pro EU political elite.
It is difficult to reconcile this with his earlier bluster about not signing away any more of the UK’s sovereignty without a referendum. But this will be yet another instance where a slight change in the newspeak name of the thing magically utterly transforms it, so an old promise can be safely ignored and discarded. He is taking a leaf out of Gordon Brown’s book, on the Labour Party election
What it actually is is a tacit acknowledgement that thanks to his incompetent butchery of the UK's defence capability the UK is no longer capable of acting effectively on the world stage without support.
What it actually means is that the UK can now no longer act militarily, in many respects, without France’s agreement.
A mutual defence pact is one thing, even military co-operation, or joint expeditionary forces - but signing over a veto on when you use your military to a foreign power is a whole other ball game, more akin to treason.
Not that UK politicians have not been happily signing away sovereign power for decades, so he can reasonably expect the supine UK electorate to put up with that as they have done with so much else that more self respecting citizens would do something about.
Sadly it is probably unlikely there will ever be a tea party movement in the UK.
What is Cameron’s agenda? One suspects ever closer European integration and the construction of a seed of a EU military. How long before a "money saving treaty" with Germany comes along?
Then there is the argument that can now be used by the political elite that If co-operation works in this areas then why not others? They will then subtly suggest, as they so often do, that it will allow ‘Europe’ to be more ‘independent’ of the US.
US politicians still somehow happily seem to imagine the EU is an unmitigated good thing for the US, despite plenty of evidence to the contrary. Is it that they think they know the nature of the beast? It wasn’t so long ago they thought it was a good idea to fund the Taliban...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)