This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
The Brexit Thread (LOCKED)
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 DANGERCLOSE  London 06 Oct 19 4.43pm |
  |
|---|---|
[Tweet Link]
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 06 Oct 19 6.35pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by cryrst
It's how you dont like it in the usa at the moment. It's not remotely political. It's 100% just the law of the land.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 06 Oct 19 6.41pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by ASCPFC
Politics would not change what a plumber does. Clearly, the Supreme Court has had it in for Boris which has affected their decision. More pandering to the Guardian readers. They probably use Sadiq's media team. That's the point. Politics doesn't change what a judge does either. The Court's are NOT political and those who now seem to think they are, encouraged by some scurrilous "reporting" in the tabloids, are totally wrong. Undermining our faith in the independence of the judiciary ought to be a taboo subject for all the UK media. It's the backbone of our society and without it we could easily collapse.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
cryrst  The garden of England 06 Oct 19 6.44pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
That's the point. Politics doesn't change what a judge does either. The Court's are NOT political and those who now seem to think they are, encouraged by some scurrilous "reporting" in the tabloids, are totally wrong. Undermining our faith in the independence of the judiciary ought to be a taboo subject for all the UK media. It's the backbone of our society and without it we could easily collapse. So cases which are found to be a wrong conviction shouldn't be questioned?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 06 Oct 19 6.56pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Spiderman
Perhaps the PR machine can explain why Chakrabati did not divulge her close friendship with Lady Hale. Unless that is acceptable in your eyes, wonder what your view would be if it had been Boris/Rees Mogg in Chakrabati's position. Firstly is it actually true? All I have heard from Chakrabati is that she regards Lady Hale as a "heroine". She would know her from the House of Lords and quite possibly from her other legal work, as both are advocates with an interest in promoting the advancement of women. Secondly why would it matter if it is true? Judges and MPs have friends, but it doesn't mean that affects their capacity to do their jobs. Judges leave their personal life, and personal opinions, in their homes. Their only master is the law. Never forget that the decision a week or so ago was unanimous. Lady Hale just happened to be the one who delivered it. Who knows who are the personal friends, and opinions, of the other 10 justices. This is the tabloids just trying to wind up people like you and undermine our legal system. They should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 06 Oct 19 7.00pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by cryrst
So cases which are found to be a wrong conviction shouldn't be questioned? If any case reaches the Supreme Court then a "wrong conviction" is an impossibility. After they have made a determination only Parliament can change the law, and that only applies on future occasions.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
ASCPFC  Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 06 Oct 19 7.11pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
That's the point. Politics doesn't change what a judge does either. The Court's are NOT political and those who now seem to think they are, encouraged by some scurrilous "reporting" in the tabloids, are totally wrong. Undermining our faith in the independence of the judiciary ought to be a taboo subject for all the UK media. It's the backbone of our society and without it we could easily collapse. The Supreme court made a political decision. Everyone can see it. They are not at all a good example of anything you are trying to say. They are entirely political and have been caught out. However, as they are untouchable as they were when they were the Lords, we will just have to put up with it. At least when they were the Lords, they recognised that they should not try to meddle with elected representatives.
Red and Blue Army! |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 06 Oct 19 7.14pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
No because that would have meant that the Supreme Court recognised that this was a matter for Parliament and they ishould keep out of politics. As they did keep out of politics why do you keep claiming they didn't? Our top court decided this matter was "judicable". Nothing political was involved in taking such a decision. I listened to the advocates and to the judgement. Everything flowed from that decision. The precedent has been set and at some point in the future someone will bring a case to the SP which will infuriate those who are celebrating today. Why? If any future government, of whatever persuasion, attempts to act outside of the law then I for one would want the Supreme Court to be there and able to strike down the attempt. I said at the start of this case far better for Parliament to decide what constrains should be put on the PM's power. Then you should be very happy because that's exactly what the situation is. All the Court has done, in this very particular case, which has never been faced before, is determine where the limits of a PM's power currently lie. If Parliament want to change that for the future then they can.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| elgrande bedford 06 Oct 19 7.22pm |
|
|---|---|
|
It's so f***ing obvious that this was a political decision, yet still certain people argue against it. You know Blair the person responsible for hundreds if not thousands of British service men/ and womens death due to his illegal war. P.s..where has Stirling gone?.
always a Norwood boy, where ever I live. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| the silurian The garden of England.(not really) 06 Oct 19 7.35pm |
|
|---|---|
|
in your opinion!!
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 06 Oct 19 7.45pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by elgrande
It's so f***ing obvious that this was a political decision, yet still certain people argue against it. You know Blair the person responsible for hundreds if not thousands of British service men/ and womens death due to his illegal war. P.s..where has Stirling gone?. What is really f***ing obvious is that some people want you to see it as political because it suits their own political agenda. What is also f***ing obvious is that some people are naive enough to believe the bs! The SC was simply a development of the Law Lords, which actually moved it away from any suggestion of political interference. That it happened whilst Blair was PM is entirely coincidental. Strengthening our legal system benefits us all. Some people would see a conspiracy in a tea cup!
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 06 Oct 19 7.52pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by the silurian
in your opinion!! I haven't yet seen or heard an alternative argument that comes within a million miles of actually being valid. The law is the law. It applies to everyone. Our Judiciary exists outside of politics. Their only master is the law. Those are facts which aren't subject to disagreement unless you believe in conspiracy theories. If you have any actual evidence to support an alternative opinion then I will be very happy to see it.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.