“If Americans had a more clear-eyed view of Putin, they would see a dictator who’s bet everything on a failed invasion, a country losing its sphere of influence, and an economy…cooling. A realistic view of his power would strip Putin of his biggest leverage: the perception of his invincibility.”
Russia’s leader isn’t nearly as strong as he’s made out to be, Andrew Ryvkin writes. “A realistic view of his power would strip Putin of his biggest leverage: the perception of his invincibility”:
Shocking scenes at SNP conference as someone says perfectly sensible things about energy, specifically nuclear power. It was an isolated incident, and his plea for sanity was overwhelmingly defeated.
Have a read back. It was a clear slight of hand talking about how many cases ended up being referred to the ECHR, as if those are the only cases affected.
Ah, now we have the accusation of racism. No I do not think that. It is interesting, however, that you tried to use a slight of hand in your previous argument. I find that quite disappointing.
I don't confess to understand law fully and you may well be correct. Let's leave NI out of the discussion for the moment since it isn't the main point people are complaining about. "What rights would you be happy to lose?" Seems to be the main line of attack here for the more liberal folk.
My response to that would be, as little as possible whilst allowing more control over immigration rates and returning people who have entered the UK by unofficial channels back to the country they came from. I think that's a valid response.
Well that's an assumption. "Oh it won't be, it will be terrible". It's not a great argument. Instead why not talk about how it could be achieved effectively?
40s UK is very different to today. Today's world is very different to today. A lot of the push for change is due to the high rates of immigration we are seeing nowadays. The ECHR is seen as something which is restricting adequate control of immigration rates.
Does altering mean giving up? And let's face it, 95% of people do not understand the ins and outs of it fully. They rely on people who do to explain it, and there will be some of those people in favour of changing it and others opposed. So very difficult to have proper debate involving everyone.
