Sensible judges DO exist
17 February 2011, 01:50 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sensible judges DO exist
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/...e-out-of-order
FIVE Muslim fanatics who claimed they have a human right to brand British soldiers "baby killers" lost their case yesterday.
In a victory for common sense, senior judges threw out appeals by the five, who ranted at troops who were on parade after they had returned from Afghanistan.The High Court judges said the focus on minority rights “should not result in overlooking the rights of the majority” when it comes to freedom of speech.
The five were appealing against convictions of public order offences, claiming they were entitled to protest under the European Convention on Human Rights.
But their case was laughed out of court when the judges ruled their rants, calling soldiers “rapists, murderers and baby killers” went well beyond “legitimate expressions of protest”. The decision was welcomed by politicians and campaigners. It comes amid growing unease at the European Convention, and Strasbourg judges riding roughshod over British laws.
Tory MP and security expert Patrick Mercer, said: “I think it’s an extraordinary piece of common sense, that those who break our laws should be charged, tried and convicted without any fear or favour."
FIVE Muslim fanatics who claimed they have a human right to brand British soldiers "baby killers" lost their case yesterday.
In a victory for common sense, senior judges threw out appeals by the five, who ranted at troops who were on parade after they had returned from Afghanistan.The High Court judges said the focus on minority rights “should not result in overlooking the rights of the majority” when it comes to freedom of speech.
The five were appealing against convictions of public order offences, claiming they were entitled to protest under the European Convention on Human Rights.
But their case was laughed out of court when the judges ruled their rants, calling soldiers “rapists, murderers and baby killers” went well beyond “legitimate expressions of protest”. The decision was welcomed by politicians and campaigners. It comes amid growing unease at the European Convention, and Strasbourg judges riding roughshod over British laws.
Tory MP and security expert Patrick Mercer, said: “I think it’s an extraordinary piece of common sense, that those who break our laws should be charged, tried and convicted without any fear or favour."
17 February 2011, 02:07 PM
#3
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/...e-out-of-order
Tory MP and security expert Patrick Mercer, said: “I think it’s an extraordinary piece of common sense, that those who break our laws should be charged, tried and convicted without any fear or favour."
Tory MP and security expert Patrick Mercer, said: “I think it’s an extraordinary piece of common sense, that those who break our laws should be charged, tried and convicted without any fear or favour."
17 February 2011, 02:42 PM
#5
Scooby Senior
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wildberg, Germany/Reading, UK
Posts: 9,706
Likes: 0
Received 73 Likes
on
54 Posts
Douglas Murray, of the think-tank, the Centre for Social Cohesion, said: “One of the remarkable things about this case is the fact that we have medieval Islamic extremists citing Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
“These are not people who are quibbling about the details of the Convention on Human Rights.
“These are people who want to institute sharia law around the world.
“They believe in the most barbaric, medieval laws but are appealing to the European Court on Human Rights. It’s enough to make a cat laugh.
“I’m delighted that the High Court has thrown out this appeal, and I hope the rest of Britain laughs in their faces.”
“These are not people who are quibbling about the details of the Convention on Human Rights.
“These are people who want to institute sharia law around the world.
“They believe in the most barbaric, medieval laws but are appealing to the European Court on Human Rights. It’s enough to make a cat laugh.
“I’m delighted that the High Court has thrown out this appeal, and I hope the rest of Britain laughs in their faces.”
Trending Topics
17 February 2011, 03:12 PM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
17 February 2011, 03:35 PM
#9
Scooby Senior
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wildberg, Germany/Reading, UK
Posts: 9,706
Likes: 0
Received 73 Likes
on
54 Posts
Islamism, not Muslimism (a concept with which I'm not familiar). I appreciate it seems pedantic, but I make the distinction on the grounds that etymology is a key part of this debate. Whilst almost all Islamists will view the news as a significant defeat, I'm sure you'll appreciate that there will be vast swathes of Muslims that welcome the ruling.
17 February 2011, 04:09 PM
#10
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Al-Qeada are Islamists; Islam4uk are Islamists; Hamas are Islamists; Hezbollah are Islamists; Islamic Jihad are Islamists; The Muslim Brotherhood are Islamists and so on and so forth. Sayyid Qtub is the key Islamic thinker underpinning the movement and was/is at odds with another branch of Sunni Islam which is underpinned by the teaching of Ibn Abd-al-Wahhabi (Saudi Arabia, for example). All, of course, seperate (violently) from Shia Islam.
While one may have an intellectual or cultural quarrel with Islam (in the same way as one may object to Christianity or Judaism), it is overwhelmingly Islamists (not Muslims as a whole) that pose the physical and political threat.
17 February 2011, 04:14 PM
#11
Islamism is not Islam. Islam is the religion, Muslims are it's adherents, Islamism is one of the political wings of the religion. One would describe a supporter or practitioner of Islamism as an Islamist. Whilst they would be Muslims, it does not offer a clear enough distinction to refer to them as such.
Al-Qeada are Islamists; Islam4uk are Islamists; Hamas are Islamists; Hezbollah are Islamists; Islamic Jihad are Islamists; The Muslim Brotherhood are Islamists and so on and so forth. Sayyid Qtub is the key Islamic thinker underpinning the movement and was/is at odds with another branch of Sunni Islam which is underpinned by the teaching of Ibn Abd-al-Wahhabi (Saudi Arabia, for example). All, of course, seperate (violently) from Shia Islam.
While one may have an intellectual or cultural quarrel with Islam (in the same way as one may object to Christianity or Judaism), it is overwhelmingly Islamists (not Muslims as a whole) that pose the physical and political threat.
Al-Qeada are Islamists; Islam4uk are Islamists; Hamas are Islamists; Hezbollah are Islamists; Islamic Jihad are Islamists; The Muslim Brotherhood are Islamists and so on and so forth. Sayyid Qtub is the key Islamic thinker underpinning the movement and was/is at odds with another branch of Sunni Islam which is underpinned by the teaching of Ibn Abd-al-Wahhabi (Saudi Arabia, for example). All, of course, seperate (violently) from Shia Islam.
While one may have an intellectual or cultural quarrel with Islam (in the same way as one may object to Christianity or Judaism), it is overwhelmingly Islamists (not Muslims as a whole) that pose the physical and political threat.
I dare say a lot of muslims would have difficulty offering quite a concise and clear explanation.
17 February 2011, 04:17 PM
#12
Scooby Senior
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wildberg, Germany/Reading, UK
Posts: 9,706
Likes: 0
Received 73 Likes
on
54 Posts
Islamism is not Islam. Islam is the religion, Muslims are it's adherents, Islamism is one of the political wings of the religion. One would describe a supporter or practitioner of Islamism as an Islamist. Whilst they would be Muslims, it does not offer a clear enough distinction to refer to them as such.
Al-Qeada are Islamists; Islam4uk are Islamists; Hamas are Islamists; Hezbollah are Islamists; Islamic Jihad are Islamists; The Muslim Brotherhood are Islamists and so on and so forth. Sayyid Qtub is the key Islamic thinker underpinning the movement and was/is at odds with another branch of Sunni Islam which is underpinned by the teaching of Ibn Abd-al-Wahhabi (Saudi Arabia, for example). All, of course, seperate (violently) from Shia Islam.
While one may have an intellectual or cultural quarrel with Islam (in the same way as one may object to Christianity or Judaism), it is overwhelmingly Islamists (not Muslims as a whole) that pose the physical and political threat.
Al-Qeada are Islamists; Islam4uk are Islamists; Hamas are Islamists; Hezbollah are Islamists; Islamic Jihad are Islamists; The Muslim Brotherhood are Islamists and so on and so forth. Sayyid Qtub is the key Islamic thinker underpinning the movement and was/is at odds with another branch of Sunni Islam which is underpinned by the teaching of Ibn Abd-al-Wahhabi (Saudi Arabia, for example). All, of course, seperate (violently) from Shia Islam.
While one may have an intellectual or cultural quarrel with Islam (in the same way as one may object to Christianity or Judaism), it is overwhelmingly Islamists (not Muslims as a whole) that pose the physical and political threat.
Islam is a book (quoran) just like christianity is also a book (bible). How people interpret what is written in that book is where all the problems lye.
17 February 2011, 04:24 PM
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Disco, Disco!
Posts: 21,825
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
17 February 2011, 05:01 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok but I still think the way some muslims are interpreting the religeon of Islam is the problem and not the Islamic religeon itself. Hundreds of millions of Muslims follow Islam peacefully where as a few loonies who are still muslim interpret it in their own way and they are the ones bringing Islam into repute.
Islam is a book (quoran) just like christianity is also a book (bible). How people interpret what is written in that book is where all the problems lye.
Islam is a book (quoran) just like christianity is also a book (bible). How people interpret what is written in that book is where all the problems lye.
Islamists reject secularism and therefor freedom of religion and justify this via their interpretation of the Qu'ran and the Hadith.
17 February 2011, 07:40 PM
#16
SN Fairy Godmother
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Far Far Away
Posts: 35,246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed.
I consider myself to be a very tolerant person, but that lot really showed themselves up. Extremists like those have no place in our society and are not welcome.
They really now are a laughing stock and rightly so. Saying that, at the time I could have cheerfully shot the lot of them and walked away without any feeling of guilt
I consider myself to be a very tolerant person, but that lot really showed themselves up. Extremists like those have no place in our society and are not welcome.
They really now are a laughing stock and rightly so. Saying that, at the time I could have cheerfully shot the lot of them and walked away without any feeling of guilt
17 February 2011, 09:09 PM
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
+1.
Correct.
James has given such concise and clear explanation many a times here, but some people just don't get it. They get their goats bleating as soon as he speaks (I should say, quotes) the word "Islam", or anything related to it. I hope they understand what he is saying this time, once and for always.
17 February 2011, 09:20 PM
#18
+1.
Correct.
James has given such concise and clear explanation many a times here, but some people just don't get it. They get their goats bleating as soon as he speaks (I should say, quotes) the word "Islam", or anything related to it. I hope they understand what he is saying this time, once and for always.
Correct.
James has given such concise and clear explanation many a times here, but some people just don't get it. They get their goats bleating as soon as he speaks (I should say, quotes) the word "Islam", or anything related to it. I hope they understand what he is saying this time, once and for always.
I think things have at times become silly. James may not be everybodies cup of tea but he is a good friend and someone who I respect a lot.
18 February 2011, 09:18 AM
#21
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/...e-out-of-order
FIVE Muslim fanatics who claimed they have a human right to brand British soldiers "baby killers" lost their case yesterday.
In a victory for common sense, senior judges threw out appeals by the five, who ranted at troops who were on parade after they had returned from Afghanistan.The High Court judges said the focus on minority rights “should not result in overlooking the rights of the majority” when it comes to freedom of speech.
The five were appealing against convictions of public order offences, claiming they were entitled to protest under the European Convention on Human Rights.
But their case was laughed out of court when the judges ruled their rants, calling soldiers “rapists, murderers and baby killers” went well beyond “legitimate expressions of protest”. The decision was welcomed by politicians and campaigners. It comes amid growing unease at the European Convention, and Strasbourg judges riding roughshod over British laws.
Tory MP and security expert Patrick Mercer, said: “I think it’s an extraordinary piece of common sense, that those who break our laws should be charged, tried and convicted without any fear or favour."
FIVE Muslim fanatics who claimed they have a human right to brand British soldiers "baby killers" lost their case yesterday.
In a victory for common sense, senior judges threw out appeals by the five, who ranted at troops who were on parade after they had returned from Afghanistan.The High Court judges said the focus on minority rights “should not result in overlooking the rights of the majority” when it comes to freedom of speech.
The five were appealing against convictions of public order offences, claiming they were entitled to protest under the European Convention on Human Rights.
But their case was laughed out of court when the judges ruled their rants, calling soldiers “rapists, murderers and baby killers” went well beyond “legitimate expressions of protest”. The decision was welcomed by politicians and campaigners. It comes amid growing unease at the European Convention, and Strasbourg judges riding roughshod over British laws.
Tory MP and security expert Patrick Mercer, said: “I think it’s an extraordinary piece of common sense, that those who break our laws should be charged, tried and convicted without any fear or favour."
19 February 2011, 10:17 AM
#22
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would be good to think that this shows a general change of attitude by the judiciary over this sort of thing and that the lefty PC Plonkers are losing their influence.
Les
Les
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Sam Witwicky
Engine Management and ECU Remapping
17
13 November 2015 10:49 AM
RS_Matt
Non Scooby Related
2
17 September 2015 08:59 PM