Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 22 Aug '10 08:18
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/7958202/Surge-in-Britons-exported-for-trial.html

    The UK judges responsible for determining whether or not to sanction the export of those wanted to stand trial elsewhere have been applying the law subsribed to by the former Labour government, as have those who have blocked the export of those, including the repatriation of aliens resident in the UK, wanted to stand trial on terrorist charges elswhere, even when there is strong prima facie evidence of guilt.

    Shows what happens when a bunch of incompetents are elected to form a government. But the judges get the blame for the resultant crazy results of strictly applying the 'law as it stands'.
  2. 22 Aug '10 08:20
    How is the text of your OP related to the article? The article claims the number of people exported for trial has risen sharply.
  3. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    22 Aug '10 09:32
    Originally posted by Sartor Resartus
    The UK judges responsible for determining whether or not to sanction the export of those wanted to stand trial elsewhere have been applying the law subsribed to by the former Labour government, as have those who have blocked the export of those, including the repatriation of aliens resident in the UK, wanted to stand trial on terrorist charges elswhe ...[text shortened]... ges get the blame for the resultant crazy results of strictly applying the 'law as it stands'.
    Judges enforcing laws "as they stand" is a good thing.

    Your post has vaporous assertions like "even when there is strong prima facie evidence of guilt" which means nothing coming from you, as I am sure you will appreciate.

    I think, as far as supporters of the so called War On Terrorism are concerned, the U.K. has been seen as a staunch ally and most reproach from daft-right has been fairly incoherent on account of the contorted partisanship necessary to somehow have it both ways.
  4. 22 Aug '10 09:32
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    How is the text of your OP related to the article? The article claims the number of people exported for trial has risen sharply.
    Had you taken the trouble to read the article instead of shooting you mouth off
    before doing so, you would have seen that it lists details of cases where Britons have been held for many months awaiting export or trial on relatively trivial charges. Some are alleged to have been beaten and held in deplorable conditions in 2nd rate EU countries like Greece.
    My point was to contrast the treatment of these with that of known terrorists in the UK similarly wanted to stand trial elsewhere.
  5. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    22 Aug '10 09:38
    Originally posted by Sartor Resartus
    Had you taken the trouble to read the article instead of shooting you mouth off
    before doing so, you would have seen that it lists details of cases where Britons have been held for many months awaiting export or trial on relatively trivial charges. Some are alleged to have been beaten and held in deplorable conditions in 2nd rate EU countries like ...[text shortened]... ment of these with that of known terrorists in the UK similarly wanted to stand trial elsewhere.
    Have another go, Sartor. You just seem intent on making some sort of outraged and jingoistic point and yet this one and only point is totally unclear. Take a second run at it.
  6. Standard member Elamef37
    Queenslander
    22 Aug '10 09:58
    Originally posted by Sartor Resartus
    Had you taken the trouble to read the article instead of shooting you mouth off
    before doing so, you would have seen that it lists details of cases where Britons have been held for many months awaiting export or trial on relatively trivial charges. Some are alleged to have been beaten and held in deplorable conditions in 2nd rate EU countries like ...[text shortened]... ment of these with that of known terrorists in the UK similarly wanted to stand trial elsewhere.
    I'm sure I've seen you in the past say in posts, that you never bothered reading links this, links that, 'say what you have to say in here', etc etc.

    Don't like it do ya!


    Where does it say in the Newspaper article about allegations of beatings and deplorable conditions?
  7. 22 Aug '10 10:19
    Originally posted by FMF
    Have another go, Sartor. You just seem intent on making some sort of outraged and jingoistic point and yet this one and only point is totally unclear. Take a second run at it.
    It is perfectly clear if you read the article and contrast the treatment of the cases cited with that of some individuals connected with known terrorist organisations similarly wanted to stand trial abroad.
    But we know you are but a pompous ass with a thick head.
  8. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    22 Aug '10 10:22 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Sartor Resartus
    It is perfectly clear if you read the article and contrast the treatment of the cases cited with that of some individuals connected with known terrorist organisations similarly wanted to stand trial abroad.
    So different countries have different standards? Well done, Sartor. Bravo. The U.K. is "better" than Greece when it comes to standards, according to you, is it? Tremendous stuff, Sartor. Bravo, once again.
  9. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    22 Aug '10 10:25 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Sartor Resartus
    But we know you are but a pompous ass with a thick head.
    This is your only coherent point so far.
  10. 22 Aug '10 10:44 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by FMF
    So different countries have different standards? Well done, Sartor. Bravo. The U.K. is "better" than Greece when it comes to standards, according to you, is it? Tremendous stuff, Sartor. Bravo, once again.
    You fool, it is not about the laws of different countries, but the anomalous treatment in the UK of individuals wanted to stand trial abroad.
    For good measure read these links and contrast with the UK failure to extradite known terrorists wanted to stand trial on terrorist charges abroad.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6736122.ece

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/7958208/Arrested-and-held-in-Britain-on-demand-of-EU-prosecutors.html
  11. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    22 Aug '10 11:15 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Sartor Resartus
    You fool, it is not about the laws of different countries, but the anomalous treatment in the UK of individuals wanted to stand trial abroad.
    By "anomalous" do you mean illegal? If not, you scarcely have a point to make, your sincerity and outrage notwithstanding.
  12. Standard member wolfgang59
    Infidel
    22 Aug '10 11:47
    SR

    I cannot see any questions posed by you in your posts. What exactly is it you want to debate?

    One point at a time please.
  13. 22 Aug '10 18:23 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by FMF
    By "anomalous" do you mean illegal? If not, you scarcely have a point to make, your sincerity and outrage notwithstanding.
    Had I intended to assert that either or both procedures were illegal I waould have said so. The term 'anomalous' does not mean 'illegal', but incongruous, or inconsistent.
    Your ignorance is evidently even greater than I had thought and is inconsistent with your implied claim to know it all, "having travelled the world, man".
  14. Standard member Palynka
    Upward Spiral
    22 Aug '10 18:34
    Brits being judged abroad seem to always be innocent according to the British press.
  15. Standard member wolfgang59
    Infidel
    22 Aug '10 18:41 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Palynka
    Brits being judged abroad seem to always be innocent according to the British press.
    Johnny Foreigner has no idea of justice or
    fair-play ... even those that do play cricket.