sadoldgit

110 Reform candidates have been dropped or swapped from January of this year. Jeez.

He attracts these people like flies to a steaming turd. The issue here is about the politics of the current Reform Party and the kind of people it attracts. You might recall the Labour campaign under Corbyn and the constant claims of antisemitism? That was all over the media in the same way that these Reform people are now. What is your issue (apart from the fact that you support a party that is catnip to racists and fascists)?

Another dodgy Reform candidate. This one with links to the BNP. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/reform-uk-drops-candidate-revealed-to-have-been-bnp-member/ar-BB1p0cBR?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=3dda2dd9d3f7442daff269af32c15b35&ei=14

Can you describe any expansionism that hasn’t been “aggressive” when it comes to the borders of other countries? How do you stand on invading sovereign nations just because they would rather align with the west than Russia? Think back through history. Where does expansionism and nationalistic fervour end? If you think that Putin is the victim here you really need to speak to people who understand what he is doing. There are certain people who will be condemned in history. You can count on the likes of Trump, Putin and Netanyahu not faring well.

Were they charred?

John Crace nailing it again. https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/27/the-farage-faithful-know-hes-a-but-they-dont-care

Ed taking one for the team!

History tells a different story. And it is not a question of our system crumbling, more of a level of scrutiny from outside of our own system. The more complex the issue, the wider the level of experience to deal with it surely helps? Anyway, another example of the sort of people who campaign for Farage. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c10l5qd8p60o.amp Bless you hypo, you are confused. To help you out, would you trust the Tory Party to determine whether Rwanda is a safe country to deport people to or the ECHR? Actually don’t answer that. You would probably think it is ok to send them to Gaza.

At the moment. Who knows what could happen in the future?

It is not for you or I to be satisfied about whether a higher court is needed. The reason is was formed on the first place still stands scrutiny but as you say, we aren’t leaving anyway and it is just another chunk of red meat thrown out to deflect from other matters. No one here gave a stuff about the ECHR until Rwanda.

As has been said, it has nothing to do with the EU. A Supreme Court based here could find itself compromised by a government. The European Court by its very nature is completely independent of possible internal state interference. If you are going to have an overseeing legislative body where total independence of any particular state is crucial, then it makes perfect sense and is why it was formed in the first place. If the state is complying with basic human rights anyway, what does it have to fear from the ECHR? The only people who need to be concerned are those who are allegedly in breech of human rights. What is wrong with that?

I suppose you could have a World Court of Human Rights but you might struggle to go further until we find aliens. Rewind a few years and I wonder how many of these people used to fret over the ECHR and spent time on forums saying we should leave it?

Back in the 60’s I bought a second hand red and white stripped shirt to kick around in (bear in mind I lived in London). The kid I used to kick around with was also a Saints fan and asked why I was wearing that shirt. I told him it was the nearest thing I could get to a Saints shirt at the time (it had a white neck) but he wouldn’t have it and kept saying it was a Stoke shirt. Things like that matter when you are a kid 😢

It wasn’t and isn’t a part of the EU though. As I said before, a higher court provides protection from the state. Just because we have decent human rights now doesn’t mean that we will in the future. We already have a government that has changed the law here to say that a country is ‘safe’ when others say it isn’t. That in itself should set alarm bells ringing. If, God forbid, Farage and Reform ever came into power, the ECHR would be even more necessary, which is why they want to leave it!

The court is there as a fail safe. It doesn’t matter what is happening today, things could change in the future. We have already seen the Tories breaking laws and lying in Parliament has now become almost commonplace/acceptable. The ECHR don’t sit there twiddling their thumbs, they have plenty of work to do. Ask yourself, why would you want to remove yourself from an institution that our country were instrumental from setting up in the first place? Do we actually need less protection of our human rights? I am immediately suspicious of the motives of any party who want less protection of human rights.

It needs a red collar.

Clearly you do not understand the difference between processing asylum applications abroad and deporting asylum seekers to Africa and leaving them there even if their applications are successful. I shall spell it out for you again if that helps. The reason why so many people are crossing the channel is because the only way they can apply for asylum here is to pitch up on our shores. If there were legal routes available they wouldn’t risk their lives in the channel. These routes could be through our embassies abroad, at the Calais camp, there are plenty of alternatives if there was a will to deal with the issue humanly. The Rwanda plan has absolutely nothing to do with processing claims. It is meant as a deterrent and more so, red meat for the gammons who lap this sort of thing up. If it was meant as a processing centre why are those whose claims would be successful not be allowed back? Can you see the difference yet? You really aren’t on top of this are you?

Surely the more protection that we have against the state the better? It seems that some would prefer to live in a dictatorship. You would think that any organisation that helps prevent the atrocities that were carried out in WW2 and the state infringement on human rights would be seen as a good thing and something to upheld. Unfortunately we currently have a government who believe that you can make a country “safe” just by passing a law saying that it is. I wonder how Batman would feel if he was packed off to Rwanda with no option of coming back if he was seeking asylum here?

Where did I say I wanted to leave NATO? There is no way we would have left NATO if Corbyn had become PM. Back to the ECHR. Are you happy that there is an organisation there to protect you/us against the state?

No I didn’t endlessly campaign for Corbyn. I campaigned against the Tories. I don’t agree with leaving NATO. We are talking about the ECHR. It is there to protect you and I against the state. Do you have a problem with that?

If only everybody in the European “club” acted to uphold human rights at all times, perhaps the club would not need to exist? Perhaps go an educate yourself about why it came about in the first place? I know you probably feel that any court that seeks to uphold human rights is full of lefty lawyers and dangerous socialists, but it is there for a reason, just like NATO and the EU are there for a reason. Would you have us leave the NATO club because we have a means to protect ourselves? Is there nothing in the Reform “contract” that you have a problem with? https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/issue/what-is-the-echr-and-why-does-it-matter/#:~:text=It was drafted in the,repeated%2C and safeguard fundamental rights.

Wouldn’t they find it easier to ship people off to Africa?

The BBC can track down people smugglers, so why can’t the French police despite the money being thrown at them? Perhaps if Sunak was more focussed on the gangs rather than his gimmicky Rwanda “deterrent” the problem wouldn’t have become so out of control? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx77l5ej2yyo.amp

It a typical Tory thing, if something becomes inconvenient, ignore it or change laws to get around it. The rules don’t apply to them, even though the UK was complicate in setting the ECHR in the first place. Like Brexit, it is a Little Englander mindset. We are Great Britain. We can do what we like, when we like, to whom we like. Like our football team, we are living on past glories and have become less relevant and are becoming more of a laughing stock. Like Rishi’s suits.

He could have accused Starmer of many things, but having his strings pulled by some shadowy backroom Labour figures is not one of them. For better or worse he is his own man and whilst it makes sense that he would seek advice from someone like Blair about winning elections, I don’t get the impression that Blair is the power behind the would be throne. The trouble is that we all know that the UK has been worn down over the last 14 years and people seem to want another Blairlike messiah figure to tell us they have a cunning plan and that all will be well. There is no cunning plan and all will not be well for some time. To give Starmer his due, he is not pretending to be something he is not and to offer something that he cannot deliver. What he can offer and deliver is change. Surely to God people don’t want another 5 years of this bunch of mediocre, inept, feckless chancers?