WHICH MUST BE HELD IN THE FOUR NATION STATES

VOTE TO LEAVE THE UNDEMOCRATIC

NAZI-PLANNED EU.

MAJOR ISSUES BULLETINS
(1.)+( 2.)+(3.)+(4.)

(5.) +(6.)+(7.)+(8.)

(9.)+(10.)+(11.)+(12.)

(13)
HUNDREDS OF LINKS

Est. 1994-

Policies-Elections 1997 and EU election 1999-Speech -1000's of Links - Archive-Top Topics and Stats

HOME
*HOME-PT 2

PAGE ONE/ PAGE TWO/PAGE THREE/ & PAGE FOUR

FREEDOM CORNER

A PEACEFUL ENGLISH REVOLUTION IS ON THE WAY-ALERT-1

UK voting system'ignores will of millions'
by
Daniel Martin for the Daily Mail -Chief Political Correspondent-JUNE 2-2015.

BRITAIN'S voting system is 'archaic' and divisive' and does not represent the will of millions, a pressure group has argued. The Electoral Reform Society, which has campaigned for proportional representation for 130 years, claimed last month's General Election was the most disproportionate ever. It said UKIP would have WON up to 80 seats using the type of PR used in many European nations, while the GREENS would have got 20. UKIP and the GREENS received 5MILLION VOTES, but under the FIRST-PAST-THE-POST system ended up with ONE MP each. An E R S-commissioned survey said under PR the TORIES would have seen their tally of MPs fall by almost 100 while LABOUR would have gone down 24...

[MONTHLY BULLETIN CHART UNTIL REFERENDUM ON EU -LATEST MAY 2017 -AT FOOT OF PAGE! ASAP!
SEE HERE! ]

RON PAUL 9-11+(1) GLOBALWARMING SCAM USA IRAQ/AFGHAN LONDON BOMBINGS COMMON PURPOSE CONSPIRACY CENTRAL BANKS +(1)

HOME ARCHIVE MAIN BULLETINS E U ENGLAND +(1) BILDERBERGERS+(1) ILLUMINATI +(1) NEW WORLD ORDER +(1)

1)U.S. Concentration Camps
2)DEC-2011- MADE-READY
3) PLANS
1)
FEMA

2)
Protocols
of
ZION

CITY

OF

LONDON

A STATE WITHIN ENGLAND

+(2)

New World Order

1000's of Video's

Dr.
John

Coleman
WHO OWNS
THE FED

POWER
OF 1)HAARP FOR GOOD 2)EVIL
Mind Control Henry Makow 1)Chemtrails
2)CREATED

C3)

PRIVATE CENTRAL BANKS
War
is a Racket

If we really want to escape the grip of human rights law-we must quit the EU.

Daily Mail

Monday, May 15,2006.

THE

Melanie

Phillips

Column

Once again, the Prime Minister is trying to surf a wave of popular outrage by announcing he will take action - which on closer examination proves to be mere froth - not least because his own policy lies at the very heart of the problem.

Thus Tony Blair has spoken out against ‘an abuse of common sense’

In the way the human rights law has been used to allow nine Afghan hijackers to remain in Britain, or free a rapist from prison only for him to commit MURDER.

BUT it is his own human rights law, which has quite simply altered the entire legal and moral culture of this country, and taken an axe to

COMMON SENSE

The Judge in last week’s Afghan ruling has been roundly pilloried. BUT common sense in this case was trounced in

2004

-when an immigration tribunal ruled on human rights grounds that it was too dangerous to send the hijackers back to Afghanistan

- even though the Taliban, from whom they fled, had been replaced by a Western-backed government.

The root of the problem here is not the wretched judge BUT the Government itself, which dragged its feet over the case for years. This was because it was paralysed by the fact that

HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

-described only last week by the Attorney-General, Lord Goldsmith, as the Government’s ‘greatest achievement’ -has created a culture of legalised lunacy.

Disruptive.

Detectives across the country are refusing to issue ‘wanted’ posters for missing foreign criminals because they say they do not want to breach their right to privacy, and risk lawsuits by releasing their names and photographs.

The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency routinely shreds the driving records of speeding and drunken drivers because bureaucrats are afraid of human rights law. That means thousands of drivers with a bad history escape with lighter punishments because Courts cannot learn the full truth about their past.

It is no use saying that such judgments misread human rights law since, because such law consists of a balancing act between competing ‘rights’ requiring the Courts to arbitrate between them, no one can be sure how any disruptive cases will end up.

The fact is that ruling after human rights ruling has turned right and wrong on their heads and radically undermined the covenant of responsibility between the INDIVIDUAL and the STATE.

To take an egregious example, human rights law has DESTROYED this country’s ability to CONTROL its OWN BORDERS.

The Courts have used the ‘human right’ to family life to reward

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.

Their absurdly generalised interpretation of the prohibition against torture - which wrenched this principle out of ALL recognition - has made it all but impossible to deport those foreigners who threaten this country’s security.

The LAW LORDS’ perverse reading of ‘DISCRIMINATION’ last year has meant that such suspects can’t even be locked up pending removal from this country.

WHAT KIND OF HUMAN RIGHTS ARE THESE,

-which actually force a country to destroy its own security along with its principles of

CITIZENSHIP

FAIRNESS

And

OBLIGATION?

At the weekend, Mr Blair said he was considering fresh legislation to prevent future Court rulings from ‘overruling the Government’. here lie the first clues to the fact that these are likely to be empty words.

FIRST, He’s only considering any change.

SECOND, human rights law doesn’t give the COURTS the POWER to overrule the GOVERNMENT.

All they can do is declare legislation incompatible with human rights law, thus putting pressure on MINSTERS. So Mr Blair has given us a straw man, which he promises he will knock down.

Then look at the way in which Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer [Blair’s old flat-mate], has been twisting and turning. There might need to be legislation, he said, to ensure that human rights law would have no effect on

PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES.

PARALYSED

BUT the whole point of human rights law is that it is supposed to be an overarching set of principles. So it CAN’T and CHANGED.

And in any case, what kind of overarching principles are these which in the Lord Chancellor’s opinion, actually imperil

PUBLIC SAFETY.

Lord Falconer appears to be saying that it’s not human rights law that’s at fault, but certain officials who are misunderstanding it. This is completely and lamentably to miss the point.

It’s not merely that this law has paralysed public bodies such as the police and the intelligence service, which say they can barely move for fear of falling foul of it.

More fundamentally still, human rights law has driven

JUSTICE

MORALITY

And

SOCIAL ORDER

-off the rails altogether.

It has acted as a grievance charter fuelling the ‘victim culture’ in which all minorities are seen as incapable of being held responsible for their actions.

As such, it has become a principle weapon against the

CULTURE and IDENTITY of the NATION.

- and by transferring power to the JUDGES, has delivered a powerful blow against DEMOCRACY.

Abolishing the HUMAN RIGHTS ACT would certainly help put a brake on that process. BUT the problem would remain that Britain is signed up to the

European Convention on Human Rights,

- which would still have supremacy over our laws.

Look for example at the Chahal judgment by the European Court of Human Rights, the key ruling preventing Britain deporting foreign undesirables.

This held that, if a person faced torture or inhuman treatment abroad, the risk to that individual from deporting him could not even be balanced against the risk he might pose to the country, which allowed him to stay.

IN other words, this ruling was a specific attack on the right of the country to decide what was in its citizens’ own best interests either to derogate from bits of this CONVENTION - as every other signatory BUT Britain has in fact done - or leave altogether.

Undemocratic.

Yesterday, Lord Falconer gave the game away when he acknowledged that- although the Human Rights Convention has separate origins from the European Union - no country can be a member of the EU unless he is also a CONVENTION signatory.

TO SOME OF US, OF COURSE, that is precisely WHY we should leave the EU, in order to

RESTORE

-OUR POWERS

SELF-GOVERNMENT

And

DEMOCRACY

But the fact that we are the Human rights prisoner of the EU is why this GOVERNMENT will never address the deformities of human rights law.

The usual suspects scream that it would be unthinkable to abolish ‘human rights’. How absurd. Real human rights are very different. Indeed, before ‘human rights’ law took hold we were rather

MORE FREE,

-not less.

INSTEAD, we would be abolishing the arbitrary and undemocratic power of the JUDGES to impose upon us a particular agenda [which is un-English] -far from universal.

In the remarkable words last year of the senior Law Lord, Lord Bingham, human rights law existed to protect vulnerable minorities - who are sometimes disliked, resented or despised -against the howls of ‘majority opinion’.

It would seem to follow that - for the JUDICIARY - Afghan hijackers, murders and other criminals are vulnerable minorities’, while the [Peace-loving majority] who are their potential victims have NO HUMAN RIGHTS at all.

Extricating OUR NATION from this MESS would undoubtedly be complicated and difficult. BUT UNLESS WE DO SO, we are unlikely much longer to have a NATION worthy of the NAME.

* * *

[Font altered-bolding & underlining used -comments in brackets]

MAY/06