(April 24, 2016 at 6:45 am)Napoléon Wrote: Those points were aimed at Rob, abaris and whoever else thought the same, not really towards you. I just quoted you as you were the last person to post towards me.

I get that I often post in a way that comes across as quite emotional, but people tend to argue with me on that emotion and not the points I make. If that's my own fault then fair enough but I don't think it should be.

No sweat, I get passionate about things sometimes too. One thing I've found is that tempering it reduces the distraction from the points I'm making ... works for me.

(April 24, 2016 at 6:45 am)Napoléon Wrote: I said it to make a point, not because I actually believe yanks are any better than anyone else at hypocrisy. But as always people on here take what they want from my posts.

Understanding is usually proportional to clarity, in communication. Stripped of nonverbal cues, and not knowing you very well, what you wrote looked pretty straightforward to me. Perhaps there's a better way to make your point, that wouldn't sow confusion? Just a thought.

(April 24, 2016 at 8:39 am)Napoléon Wrote: Fuck sake, this is just another example of people not knowing a damn thing about what they're talking about. You really think that we need the EU to safeguard human rights?

No, I don't think, the EU in it's current state is safeguarding human rights. Apart from, insert Life of Brian here.

Everyone on it's on on the other hand doesn't safeguard shit. It's entirely up to whatever fucker currently calls the shots in any given country. Are they in a position to change the particular constitution? If so, they probably will in favor of their agenda. No international conventions to be observed, no sanctions if they aren't observed. In short, back to the way things were some 60 years ago with everyone cooking their own soup. The difference being that the UK isn't an empire anymore. Just a puny island, not more or less important than any other country on the continent.

And if you don't want to be misunderstood, maybe you should consider coming over as less nationalistic.

(April 24, 2016 at 8:39 am)Napoléon Wrote: So you think the EU as a political entity has the monopoly on human rights?

Fuck sake, this is just another example of people not knowing a damn thing about what they're talking about. You really think that we need the EU to safeguard human rights?

No, not exactly but I do see it as a safeguard against rash and fickle decision-making about policy, stopping the likes of the BNP and UKIP from getting their (right wing) way over issues that happen to grab the public imagination for a short time. Basically I see public opinion here as very volatile, and I think having a kind of 'federal' law stops us acting in the heat of the moment without thinking things through and stops right wing parties getting a foothold.

If we were out of it and they replaced the Human Rights Act with the proposed Bill of Rights what's the catch? It's presumably to remove something from it and if that's the case, what's to stop it happening again... and again... digging away at it little by little... till it barely resembles a list of rights at all? All at the whim of the current leadership and the current popular mood whoever and whatever they may be.

OK, I've collected my thoughts together.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLcTaMkEcT4

(April 24, 2016 at 2:46 pm)Emjay Wrote: No, not exactly but I do see it as a safeguard against rash and fickle decision-making about policy, stopping the likes of the BNP and UKIP from getting their (right wing) way over issues that happen to grab the public imagination for a short time. Basically I see public opinion here as very volatile, and I think having a kind of 'federal' law stops us acting in the heat of the moment without thinking things through and stops right wing parties getting a foothold.

If we were out of it and they replaced the Human Rights Act with the proposed Bill of Rights what's the catch? It's presumably to remove something from it and if that's the case, what's to stop it happening again... and again... digging away at it little by little... till it barely resembles a list of rights at all? All at the whim of the current leadership and the current popular mood whoever and whatever they may be.

Oh great. Let's lump UKIP and the BNP together. I thought that one had gone out of fashion since the last election but evidently I'm wrong. There really are still people out there who do this. Makes it hard to take anything else you say seriously.

(April 25, 2016 at 2:21 pm)Napoléon Wrote:

(April 24, 2016 at 2:46 pm)Emjay Wrote: No, not exactly but I do see it as a safeguard against rash and fickle decision-making about policy, stopping the likes of the BNP and UKIP from getting their (right wing) way over issues that happen to grab the public imagination for a short time. Basically I see public opinion here as very volatile, and I think having a kind of 'federal' law stops us acting in the heat of the moment without thinking things through and stops right wing parties getting a foothold.

If we were out of it and they replaced the Human Rights Act with the proposed Bill of Rights what's the catch? It's presumably to remove something from it and if that's the case, what's to stop it happening again... and again... digging away at it little by little... till it barely resembles a list of rights at all? All at the whim of the current leadership and the current popular mood whoever and whatever they may be.

Oh great. Let's lump UKIP and the BNP together. I thought that one had gone out of fashion since the last election but evidently I'm wrong. There really are still people out there who do this. Makes it hard to take anything else you say seriously.

In that case, don't take anything I say seriously... not like you have been anyway. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, just giving my reasons for the vote I'll be making... you asked for opinions after all and that's mine.

UKIP are not the BNP, no -- but they're still damn awful.

Okay Napo, having now read some of UKiP's manifesto I'm willing to unlump them from the BNP... apart from their commitment to leave the EU, they don't seem that much different from the other major parties in terms of policies. So apologies for my ignorance.

(April 25, 2016 at 4:11 pm)Alasdair Ham Wrote: UKIP are not the BNP, no -- but they're still damn awful.

And some BNP have become UKIP.

(April 27, 2016 at 4:02 am)Mathilda Wrote:

(April 25, 2016 at 4:11 pm)Alasdair Ham Wrote: UKIP are not the BNP, no -- but they're still damn awful.

And some BNP have become UKIP.

Peoples views changing? Oh the horror!

Seriously, so what?