I doubt that there is anyone, right or left, who does not have a view about how some people should be coerced to live their lives. Though those of us who are more liberal or libertarian in our views would only support intervention where there is evidence that it would be warranted and effective. The curious thing about the Daily Mail is that although it has a ludicrous bee in its bonnet about the HRA, over the last few years it’s actually taken a more liberal line than this government on many policies. 25 years ago the Daily Mail would have been a full-on supporters of ID Cards and the surveillance state, of universal DNA databases and of just about any old bollocks that the police got up to, particularly if it was a miner being abused. There’s probably a thesis in that for somebody!

“Josh, HB has said a lot of hideous things, but I don’t think he’s ever confessed to being a Nazi.”

Up to now, I was assuming that the Nazis had chucked him out, and sent him over here.

I “personally” am not a member of a trade union and very unlikely to ever join one, so why should I care about someone else’s right to do so? It’s not “fundamental” to me. Furthermore, I don’t smoke, so why should I care that social services are preventing couples who smoke from adopting children. Or that children deemed “obese” are being removed from their parents put into care — it’s hardly a “fundamental” right to feed your children as you see fit, is it? It’s people like you who “personally” don’t give a damn about restraining the power of government and letting people live in ways you “personally” wouldn’t who this authoritarian government has been pandering to, not the Daily Mail.

There are much more serious infringements to our liberties to be concerned about.

Yes, and here is Polly Toynbee in today’s Guardian explaining that the future lies with every bigger government exercising power of a population ever closer to being serfs:

“Labour’s plans to introduce identity cards, to allow police to hold terrorist suspects without trial for 42 days and the widespread use of CCTV cameras in public places were seen by conspiracy theorists as sinister encroachments on ancient civil liberties.”

How about that for a “hateful and dishonest agenda” — the trashing of rights that ordinary people have fought for and enjoyed for centuries, with any defence of them regarded as insane. This is the language of the jackboot, as approved by the editors of the Guardian .

52% of Saudi Arabia’s population are de facto, ’sub-male’ slaves.

If a women were forced to make a choice between living in Russia or Saudi Arabia, which country do you think she’d chose?

IN any case, Russia is still pretty bad.

It seems to me that the more we talk about human rights, the worse off those rights tend to become.

Many people now even consider the entire concept neo-colonialist and imperialist with HR campaigns merely attempts at exporting and imposing western values on non-western peoples.

I don’t personally see smoking in public places and killing and tormenting animals for fun as fundamental rights, and driving as fast as you like on the roads even less so. There are much more serious infringements to our liberties to be concerned about. And you think that “date” rapers shouldn’t be prosecuted? As for the “hatred” laws, I think you’ll find very mixed opinions on the left about these.

By blaming people who read the Daily Mail, of course, for the actions of the government. A paper that is not much read by the elite in Westminster and Brussels that really has power of people’s lives.

So Daily Mail readers are “ordinary people” but Guardian readers aren’t? In any case I didn’t blame the readers of the Daily Mail – I blame the editor, who is responsible for its hateful and dishonest agenda, and those in the government who are stupid and unprincipled enough to think that if they try to appease it it will start being nice to them. But hey, I’m happy to concede that Straw is cynical and unprincipled enough to water down the HRA even without any outside encouragemet.

The (Jewish) director of the More4 programme Independent Minds which celebrated UDHR 60 by having David Irving spout on the programme says:2Irving is someone who reflects the limits of freedom of expression. He epitomises repellent views which make us aware of the limits of freedom of expression. It would be derelict not to include someone who challenges how we look at that freedom.”
http://www.totallyjewish.com/news/national/c-10754/outrage-as-irving-given-platform-in-free-speech-film/

Why does this earnestly self flagellating man need to have the obvious pointed out by this editorial:
“But should we encourage people to think twice before giving him a platform that confers a degree of legitimacy? And should we urge them to consider their audience, suggesting they may want to offer facts that dispel the myths he propogates? Absolutely.

Irving may be ‘an independent mind’, but that does not mean we have to hear his opinions independently of the truth.”
http://www.totallyjewish.com/news/TJ_leader/?content_id=10744

So the metropolitan elite are now even interfering in our right to rape? It’s political correctness gawn maaad.

The Guardian has been a cheerleader for most of the attacks on liberty, from banning smoking and hunting to speed cameras & CCTV to changes to the law to allow it to prosecute “haters”, date rapists etc etc.

And where did I blame “ordinary people”?

By blaming people who read the Daily Mail, of course, for the actions of the government. A paper that is not much read by the elite in Westminster and Brussels that really has power of people’s lives.

but after the left wins in Iraq we will push for a free Afghanistan

The ‘left’ (by which you presumably mean anti-Western totalitarian-sympathising scumbags like yourself, who share more in common in terms of foreign policy with David Duke than anything recognisable to me as the ‘left’), already lost Iraq. We invaded, deposed Saddam, instituted a democratic government and over the last year and a half have slowly contained the bloodthirsty ‘insurgency’ of which cunts like you were so fond. Wasn’t exactly what the ‘left’ wanted when it was marching through London in February 2003, is it?

As for Afghanistan, it is far more free than it ever was under the Taliban or ever would be if were to abandon it to its fate as you apparently advocate.

You really are a class A, unmitigated, complete fucking wanker aren’t you?