Anders Breivik makes the case for Brexit

Well the news moves my decision over the boundary.

Kind of fed up of bureaucrats ramming “human rights” down everyone’s throats. Let’s hope that the Tories go through with their plans, and make sure this kind of absurdity can never happen in this country.

errm you know Norway isn’t in the EU?

still, let’s not let the facts get in the way of taking the horrific actions of an individual and using them to heap blame on a set of entirely rational and widely agreed (both within and beyond the EU) set of basic human rights.

3/10

I know Norway isn’t. But the decision of the Norwegian courts is based on exactly the same kind of double-think logic which the EU wishes to enforce regarding “Human Rights”; devoid of logic, reason or justice.

EDIT: The decision was made in Norway by a norwegian court and the european court of human rights is not an EU institution

The prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment represents a fundamental value in a democratic society

Yes terrible logic there with no reason and no justice 😯

I am sure if you keep posting eventually you will get something correct but my money is on the monkey
ORIGINAL

you know Norway isn’t in the EU?

😆
There is nothing more to say on this thread
Self pwns are the best

I’m getting slightly tired now of repeating that the European Court of Human Rights is not part of the EU. 🙄

Rachel

errm you know Norway isn’t in the EU?

… and it was an Oslo district court that made the decision. 3/10 seems overly generous TBH.

and the EHCR is not the EU so frankly 0/10

blah blah blahdevoid of logicblah blah blah

I think I’ve picked up the central failure of your argument.

Stuffed full of win, this one…

So Joe you’d like the rule of emotion not law?
This is the quote on upholding one of Anders points
“The prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment represents a fundamental value in a democratic society. This applies no matter what – also in the treatment of terrorists and killers.”
Which is about his isolation whilst in gaol.
So not double-think but application of the law.

Hopefully they will now put him in general prison population and some one will remove the worthless piece of shit from the planet.

Norway isn’t. But the decision of the Norwegian courts is based on exactly the same kind of double-think logic which the EU wishes to enforce regarding “Human Rights”; devoid of logic, reason or justice.

I’m not sure I follow?

I’m with the OP, ‘uman rights should only apply to people we like.

It’s elf and PC gone mad.

They’ll be after our bent bananas and pinta next.

What mugs we are!

Will he delete the thread before the edit window closes?

I’m not sure I follow?

Good news …you are rational.

I’m not sure I follow?

[UKIP logic]

“If I include the abbreviation EU in any critical message it’s an external body responsible for the perceived injustice I’m referring to rather than a national court operating within the law of it’s own country and therefore a bad thing rather than just a decent set of people trying their best to do the right thing.”

[/UKIP logic]

So will you also want us to pull out of the United Nations, which has the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights as pretty key policies?

gaol

How is this pronounced, and is it any different to saying/typing jail?

Genuine question, often wondered why and just assumed it was an old word as it’s usually applied to old jails, but some people still use it.

Biddons/Water bottles, tomato/tomato?

Joe – Member
I know Norway isn’t. But the decision of the Norwegian courts is based on exactly the same kind of double-think logic which the EU wishes to enforce regarding “Human Rights”; devoid of logic, reason or justice.

European Convention on Human Rights was drawn up largely by Solicitor General Sir David Patrick Maxwell Fyfe, 1st Earl of Kilmuir at the behest of Winston Churchill

its more British than drizzle and bacon sarnies

(I award you -3/10)

I really like the one with two deer, and one had a birthmark in the shape of a target. That’s my favourite.

How is this pronounced, and is it any different to saying/typing jail?

Nope it is just the older form of jail and pronounced the same.

thisisnotaspoon – Member

gaol

How is this pronounced, and is it any different to saying/typing jail?

Genuine question, often wondered why and just assumed it was an old word as it’s usually applied to old jails, but some people still use it.

Biddons/Water bottles, tomato/tomato?

Pronounced exactly the same. Gaol is the ‘correct’ / original spelling of it, Jail would be the more ‘modern’ / US version, like taking the ‘u’ out of Colour, it’s ‘wrong’ but more phonetically correct.

I’m not sure which is taught in Schools in the UK now, but when I was in school in the 80s it was ‘Gaol’ which was a nightmare for a Dyslexic like me who read, and said it as Goal – Jail or Gaol should never be your Goal in life as my teacher used to say.

Incidentally, you’ll be happy to know that ill-considered knee jerk threads like these very much make the case for staying in Europe to me.

redeem youself, blame it on Cherie Blair instead..

Well the news moves my decision over the boundary.

I suspect that this might not be true.

Brexit or not aside, I have to say that even as a firm believer in Human Rights, I really think that we need to opt out of the ECHR and write our own.

Whilst I believe passionately in Human Rights I also believe that if you violate the human rights of others (via crime) you forfeit your own to the extent prescribed by the law of the land in which you do so. If those laws prescribe solitary confinement or proscribe voting for criminals (which it appears is also deemed inhumane) then those decisions should stand. Sooner or later someone’s going to point out that freedom is also a basic human right and incarceration degrading and inhuman and we’ll all be screwed.

You have to admit though, Breivik makes a compelling argument:

“‘Sometimes I’ve been fed the same microwave meal two days in a row. It might sound comical to you, but it’s worse than waterboarding.”

I’m interested in who judged him sane enough to be housed in a mainstream prison. There must come a point where the extremeness of your political beliefs is indistinguishable from mental illness.

Like you see in this place sometimes.

Just so a little bit of good can come out of this thread.

Would someone be so kind as to explain in a nutshell … how/why/implications of ECHR not being part of the EU.

ta

Can we not just hang the little shit and be done with it?
Human whats?

No pudding!

Same pudding twice in a row!

“‘Sometimes I’ve been fed the same microwave meal two days in a row. It might sound comical to you, but it’s worse than waterboarding.”

you’re not really supposed to use the Mash as an actual source

It’s not like the brexit debate has been full of rational and well argued points based in fact, but even so, this is a standout Stupid Argument.

you’re not really supposed to use the Mash as an actual source

Does sound like it, but…

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/16/anders-breivik-norway-mass-killer-claims-state-trying-to-kill-him

The quote itself is from that fine bastion of reportage, The Mail, but of course linking to that would be worse than waterboarding.

Might want to check out who was the chief architect of this was – Clue it was us

Sooner or later someone’s going to point out that freedom is also a basic human right and incarceration degrading and inhuman and we’ll all be screwed.

Terrible slippery slope argument

Human rights does not preclude prisons/justice/incarceration it precludes treating prisoners inhumanely once incarcerated.

The fact some are willing to remove his because he is a baddy is the exact reason we need someone independent to stop the govt of the day abusing an individual to look tough and win over DM types – not aimed at the poster I have no idea what your general outlook is to be very clear.

It’s not like the brexit debate has been full of rational and well argued points based in fact, but even so, this is a standout Stupid Argument.

It’s obvious really. We don’t want to make silly decisions, like the EU didn’t in this case, or ever in this context because they’re not the ECHR, so we need to leave the EU, which isn’t the ECHR, so that we won’t make silly decisions like Norway, who aren’t in the EU or bound by the ECHR, but did make a silly decision according to Joe. So when we’re more like the people who made a silly decision we will be free of influence from the people who didn’t make a silly decision and so they’ll no longer force us to make a silly decision, just like how they didn’t with Norway, who did make a silly* decision.

*opinion, obviously.

Balls. Ha ha thank you Sir Humphrey for that clear and logical advice

Members of the EU are obliged to be bound by the judgemnets of the ECHR

Norway voted not to join the EU but the government was so pro they signed up for pretty much everything. Possibly one of the most un-democratic things to have occurred anywhere in modern rimes.