British Expats

British Expats (https://britishexpats.com/forum/)
-   Goa (https://britishexpats.com/forum/goa-170/)
-   -   In To-day's Newspapers (https://britishexpats.com/forum/goa-170/days-newspapers-558924/)

dreadsoc Sep 13th 2011 11:36 am

Re: In To-day's Newspapers
 

Originally Posted by fatbrit (Post 9618386)
I'm positively certain that it can't possibly have been anything to do with the fact that before the HRA there was no other way that people could redress a breach of their rights under the ECHR in the British courts.

Hum - think you may be mistaken there - the ECHR has always been available for British subjects eg : (to state just one of many examples I could cite) the case of GIZZARD, LUCAS, BROWN et al who appealed their GBH convictions to the ECHR. They were sado masochists who were convicted of GBH for hideous injuries consensually inflicted on each other. They took it to Europe claiming their human rights were being breached by not being allowed to consent to such. They lost their case on the grounds that the human rights did not allow for consent to things of such moral outrage to society.

So again convince me why the UK has so many more cases going to ECHR than the rest of the EU - none of which countries have any more opportunity that the UK for redressal of human rights ... because your answer does not convince me as my factual knowledge which comes from studying and practicing law somewhat contradicts your post.

Dread - x

fatbrit Sep 13th 2011 12:07 pm

Re: In To-day's Newspapers
 

Originally Posted by dreadsoc (Post 9619393)
Hum - think you may be mistaken there - the ECHR has always been available for British subjects eg : (to state just one of many examples I could cite) the case of GIZZARD, LUCAS, BROWN et al who appealed their GBH convictions to the ECHR. They were sado masochists who were convicted of GBH for hideous injuries consensually inflicted on each other. They took it to Europe claiming their human rights were being breached by not being allowed to consent to such. They lost their case on the grounds that the human rights did not allow for consent to things of such moral outrage to society.

So again convince me why the UK has so many more cases going to ECHR than the rest of the EU - none of which countries have any more opportunity that the UK for redressal of human rights ... because your answer does not convince me as my factual knowledge which comes from studying and practicing law somewhat contradicts your post.

Dread - x

Er....you're either failing to understand or making up what I said there. The point was that taking your case to the ECHR was the only way for those under UK jurisdiction to enjoy their treaty rights before enactment of HRA in 2000. Hence, the UK-derived cases pre 2000 were proportionally more than those from other countries who did not need to make the trip to Strasbourg to enjoy their rights.

I notice that, like Noni, you like to cherry pick the cases. How about taking, for example, the Swaddling ECHR case which has been a great benefit to UK expats deciding to return home? Then again from Steve's post, it looks like we don't actually have any expats in this part of the forum so perhaps it wouldn't interest them!

Your knowledge of the law and human rights legislation is, I can assure you, not exclusive in this particular thread.

noni Sep 13th 2011 1:53 pm

Re: In To-day's Newspapers
 

Originally Posted by fatbrit (Post 9619443)
Er....you're either failing to understand or making up what I said there. The point was that taking your case to the ECHR was the only way for those under UK jurisdiction to enjoy their treaty rights before enactment of HRA in 2000. Hence, the UK-derived cases pre 2000 were proportionally more than those from other countries who did not need to make the trip to Strasbourg to enjoy their rights.

I notice that, like Noni, you like to cherry pick the cases. How about taking, for example, the Swaddling ECHR case which has been a great benefit to UK expats deciding to return home? Then again from Steve's post, it looks like we don't actually have any expats in this part of the forum so perhaps it wouldn't interest them!

Your knowledge of the law and human rights legislation is, I can assure you, not exclusive in this particular thread.

:ohmy: That jumping sheep is making me dizzy!

noni Sep 13th 2011 2:27 pm

Re: In To-day's Newspapers
 
From the gospel according to The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/se...-dock-benefits

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...-lose-benefits

Bipat Sep 13th 2011 7:30 pm

Re: In To-day's Newspapers
 

Originally Posted by dreadsoc (Post 9619393)
Hum - think you may be mistaken there - the ECHR has always been available for British subjects eg : (to state just one of many examples I could cite) the case of GIZZARD, LUCAS, BROWN et al who appealed their GBH convictions to the ECHR. They were sado masochists who were convicted of GBH for hideous injuries consensually inflicted on each other. They took it to Europe claiming their human rights were being breached by not being allowed to consent to such. They lost their case on the grounds that the human rights did not allow for consent to things of such moral outrage to society.

So again convince me why the UK has so many more cases going to ECHR than the rest of the EU - none of which countries have any more opportunity that the UK for redressal of human rights ... because your answer does not convince me as my factual knowledge which comes from studying and practicing law somewhat contradicts your post.

Dread - x

Would be interested (as you have mentioned it ) about your law practice. I had wondered if you had some legal knowledge but 'crossed it off my mind' finally when quote " Represented by the Inn at which said witch had a partnership" but maybe a 'typo'. ????
This thread 3418.
Myself took it up as a very late second career so never practiced only employed.

Bipat Sep 13th 2011 7:49 pm

Re: In To-day's Newspapers
 

Originally Posted by SteveKingswear (Post 9619364)
I find some of the views expressed in the Goa part of the forum fascinating given that BE is a forum whose main focus is immigration and many of us are indeed immigrants. There seems to be a disconnect with some people.

Whilst not exactly an immigrant, I do spend a lot of time each year in both India and Spain. However and I would guess that this is true of all the Brits that contribute to this forum:
1) I have private medical cover - should I need any medical treatment whilst abroad it can and would be paid for.
2) I am totally self funded, I bring with me and or draw on funds from the UK to support myself whilst abroad.
3) I support the local economy in what ever way I can.
4) I support local charities.
5) I totally accept and try to integrate the way of life and customs of what ever country I am in.

Were it not for the draconian attitude of the Indian authorities I would undoubtedly have done more, started a business employing local labour, but thanks to very sound advice from this forum did not persue that idea.

How many of the people coming into the UK either legally or illegally could say the same? Very very few if any! No Noni is absolutely right, we do not need these ponces bleeding us dry, trying to change our country and the way we have traditionally lived, what right do they have to question our way of life? Fortunately it is relatively few, but for those few, bollox to there human rights let them bugger off to whence they came.

Just a view you understand, just a view![/QUOTE]

Thousands Steve; over the decades the majority of immigrants have never been on major benefits. Yes they had access to the NHS. Would we have an NHS without the immigrants who came in the 1950s and 60s to work there??
Look at the average private school and the number of pupils of immigrant origin paying for their education, having also payed their taxes.
Charities; in our area the 'Riding for disabled' is funded almost completely by an 'immigrant' the local Sikh temples seem to feed the local 'homeless'.
Just a few examples.
I agree with your views on the radical extremists (have heard it often enough at home!!) He would fit in nicely with the 'rightists' on this forum!!!

SteveKingswear Sep 13th 2011 8:06 pm

Re: In To-day's Newspapers
 
Thousands Steve; over the decades the majority of immigrants have never been on major benefits. Yes they had access to the NHS. Would we have an NHS without the immigrants who came in the 1950s and 60s to work there??
Look at the average private school and the number of pupils of immigrant origin paying for their education, having also payed their taxes.
Charities; in our area the 'Riding for disabled' is funded almost completely by an 'immigrant' the local Sikh temples seem to feed the local 'homeless'.
Just a few examples.
I agree with your views on the radical extremists (have heard it often enough at home!!) He would fit in nicely with the 'rightists' on this forum!!![/QUOTE]

You are talking about immigrants of 60 and 70 years ago, which is akin to talking about colonial India. Whilst interesting as a history lesson your post has no relevance to the immigrant of today. I would maintain that what I suggest is far closer to the truth.

Bipat Sep 13th 2011 8:21 pm

Re: In To-day's Newspapers
 

Originally Posted by SteveKingswear (Post 9620093)
Thousands Steve; over the decades the majority of immigrants have never been on major benefits. Yes they had access to the NHS. Would we have an NHS without the immigrants who came in the 1950s and 60s to work there??
Look at the average private school and the number of pupils of immigrant origin paying for their education, having also payed their taxes.
Charities; in our area the 'Riding for disabled' is funded almost completely by an 'immigrant' the local Sikh temples seem to feed the local 'homeless'.
Just a few examples.
I agree with your views on the radical extremists (have heard it often enough at home!!) He would fit in nicely with the 'rightists' on this forum!!!

You are talking about immigrants of 60 and 70 years ago, which is akin to talking about colonial India. Whilst interesting as a history lesson your post has no relevance to the immigrant of today. I would maintain that what I suggest is far closer to the truth.[/QUOTE]


I don't think my husband and children see themselves as a 'history lesson' Steve. OH can still manage to walk!!! You must be very young yourself?
Yes the situation in the last few years has changed but the thousands as I have described are still 'immigrants' still runnng their businesses, still working in the NHS and factories. Still capable of being insulted by gross generalisations.
When in your way of thinking does an immigrant no longer count as an immigrant? Maybe you are accepting that after a time they are just ordinary citizens like any other if so thank you.

SteveKingswear Sep 13th 2011 8:35 pm

Re: In To-day's Newspapers
 
Anybody that came here in the 50's or 60's would assuming they were 18 on arrival would be at least 60years of age and thats assuming they arrived in1969 anyone arriving in 1950 would now be 79years of age. so in point of fact the people that you refer too are in the main way past retirement age. However these were not the people I was referring too; I was referring to the recent immigrants and particuarly the illegal immigrants. My view that there are far to many of those that fall into the catagory of 'feckless ponces' hasn't changed!
Oh and I'm 58 years young!

Just a view you understand, just a view!

Bipat Sep 13th 2011 9:12 pm

Re: In To-day's Newspapers
 

Originally Posted by SteveKingswear (Post 9620141)
Anybody that came here in the 50's or 60's would assuming they were 18 on arrival would be at least 60years of age and thats assuming they arrived in1969 anyone arriving in 1950 would now be 79years of age. so in point of fact the people that you refer too are in the main way past retirement age. However these were not the people I was referring too; I was referring to the recent immigrants and particuarly the illegal immigrants. My view that there are far to many of those that fall into the catagory of 'feckless ponces' hasn't changed!
Oh and I'm 58 years young!

Just a view you understand, just a view!

Not sure of your logic Steve, immigration was a continuous process, I mentioned 50s and 60s as many came when workers were needed after the war and the start up of the NHS. They still continued to come after that and still continued to work.
Illegal immigrants are a separate category and also how recent is recent? May be we could just refer to 'feckless ponces' as such and not immigrants in general and then there would be no misunderstanding.
Just a thought.

SteveKingswear Sep 13th 2011 10:10 pm

Re: In To-day's Newspapers
 
I made it quite clear in my original post, I referrded to immigrants both legal and illegal, so obviously I was refering to the current wave of immigrants. I also made it very clear that it was relatively few, but even a few is too many.

The big difference between thr immigrant of the 50's and 60's is that they were invited over by government, invariably they all spoke English and they came over wanting to work. How does that compare with the thousands of illegal immigrants that are landing on our shores each year, in fact how does it compare with a lot of the legal immigrants that arrive.

I quite agree Bipat, the immigrant of today is a totally different kettle of fish to that of the 60's - One of the reasons I spend so much time in India is that one of my closest friends is a doctor at Escorts heart hospital in Delhi. We were at prep school together and have been close friends ever since. His parents were both doctors at St Andrews hospital in East London and in fact his father operated on me when I was a child. There is no way they can be compared to the current immigrants many of whom not only don't speak English they don't want to learn.

noni Sep 13th 2011 10:16 pm

Re: In To-day's Newspapers
 

Originally Posted by Bipat (Post 9620184)
Not sure of your logic Steve, immigration was a continuous process, I mentioned 50s and 60s as many came when workers were needed after the war and the start up of the NHS. They still continued to come after that and still continued to work.
Illegal immigrants are a separate category and also how recent is recent? May be we could just refer to 'feckless ponces' as such and not immigrants in general and then there would be no misunderstanding.
Just a thought.


:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: Oh! Bipat - nobody is talking about professionals, NHS workers (if they can communicate in English) etc. The ones we are moaning about are all those on benefits taking money out of our system, and putting nothing back in. We have enough of our own scroungers. :frown:


Then there are those who try to push their religion down our throats and want to live their lives in our country by their laws.

Come here to live, live by our laws and standards.

Bipat Sep 13th 2011 10:44 pm

Re: In To-day's Newspapers
 

Originally Posted by noni (Post 9620275)
:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: Oh! Bipat - nobody is talking about professionals, NHS workers (if they can communicate in English) etc. The ones we are moaning about are all those on benefits taking money out of our system, and putting nothing back in. We have enough of our own scroungers. :frown:


Then there are those who try to push their religion down our throats and want to live their lives in our country by their laws.

Come here to live, live by our laws and standards.


I was not talking about profesionals either Noni, there are thousands of workers in every sphere of work that are of immigrant origin. They include the taxi drivers that take us to Heathrow, middle class men from Afghanistan who would love to go home but are scared and have brought their families to UK. Wouldn't you in their place?
My grouse is when all are lumped together this more than occasionally happens on this forum and their children also included.
Your last point Christians have been doing that around the world for centuries, that's how Goa was established, and OH ancestors were chucked out. (slightly tongue in cheek).

Bipat Sep 13th 2011 10:59 pm

Re: In To-day's Newspapers
 

Originally Posted by SteveKingswear (Post 9620269)
I made it quite clear in my original post, I referrded to immigrants both legal and illegal, so obviously I was refering to the current wave of immigrants. I also made it very clear that it was relatively few, but even a few is too many..

Agee with you. Apologies if I misunderstood your post.

noni Sep 13th 2011 11:14 pm

Re: In To-day's Newspapers
 

Originally Posted by Bipat (Post 9620321)
I was not talking about profesionals either Noni, there are thousands of workers in every sphere of work that are of immigrant origin. They include the taxi drivers that take us to Heathrow, middle class men from Afghanistan who would love to go home but are scared and have brought their families to UK. Wouldn't you in their place?
My grouse is when all are lumped together this more than occasionally happens on this forum and their children also included.
Your last point Christians have been doing that around the world for centuries, that's how Goa was established, and OH ancestors were chucked out. (slightly tongue in cheek).

I don't bring religion into it - BUT If in a Muslim countries we have to live by their rules, so why can't they do the same here.

Below was passed on to me by another member, wondered whether to post as may offend some, buy Hey Ho! here we go :unsure::unsure:



Dear All
Please pass it on to all hard working,tax paying people & ask if we are tired like Mr Cosby or not.If yes can Lobby our counsillors & MPs.?



"I'm 76 and I'm Tired"– by Bill Cosby

I'm 76. Except for brief period in the 50's when I was doing my National
Service, I've worked hard since I was 17. Except for some serious health
challenges, I put in 50-hour weeks, and didn't call in sick in nearly 40
years. I made a reasonable salary, but I didn't inherit my job or my income,
and I worked to get where I am. Given the economy, it looks as though
retirement was a bad idea, and I'm tired. Very tired.

I'm tired of being told that I have to "spread the wealth" to people who don't have my work ethic. I'm tired of being told the government will take the money I earned, by force if necessary, and give it to people too lazy to earn it.

I'm tired of being told that Islam is a "Religion of Peace," when every day
I can read dozens of stories of Muslim men killing their sisters, wives and daughters for their family "honour"; of Muslims rioting over some slight offense; of Muslims murdering Christian and Jews because they aren't "believers"; of Muslims burning schools for girls; of Muslims stoning teenage rape victims to death for "adultery"; of Muslims mutilating the genitals of little girls; all in the name of Allah, because the Qur'an and Sharia law tells them to.
I'm tired of being told that out of "tolerance for other cultures" we must
let Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries use our oil money to fund mosques
and mandrassa Islamic schools to preach hate in Australia, New Zealand, UK,
America and Canada, while no one from these countries are allowed to fund a
church, synagogue or religious school in Saudi Arabia or any other Arab
country to teach love and tolerance..

I'm tired of being told I must lower my living standard to fight global
warming, which no one is allowed to debate.

I'm tired of being told that drug addicts have a disease, and I must help
support and treat them, and pay for the damage they do. Did a giant germ
rush out of a dark alley, grab them, and stuff white powder up their noses
or stick a needle in their arm while they tried to fight it off?

I'm tired of hearing wealthy athletes, entertainers and politicians of all
parties talking about innocent mistakes, stupid mistakes or youthful
mistakes, when we all know they think their only mistake was getting caught.
I'm tired of people with a sense of entitlement, rich or poor.

I'm really tired of people who don't take responsibility for their lives and
actions. I'm tired of hearing them blame the government, or discrimination
or big-whatever for their problems.

I'm also tired and fed up with seeing young men and women in their teens and early 20's bedeck themselves in tattoos and face studs, thereby making themselves un-employable and claiming money from the Government.

Yes, I'm damn tired. But I'm also glad to be 76.. Because, mostly, I'm not
going to have to see the world these people are making. I'm just sorry for
my granddaughter and her children. Thank God I'm on the way out and not on the way in


with kind regards,

Bill Crosby.


All times are GMT -12. The time now is 4:34 am.

Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.