Nice bit of ad hominem there John B. How about addressing my main point which was the HRA didn’t stop the last (hopefully the very last) Labour govt from destroying more civil liberties than any Tory one could have dreamt of? As a normal, taxpaying, law abiding citizen, my rights have been severely curtailed over the last 13 years, and the HRA did nothing to prevent that.

I suspect that the only differences will be some tinkering with the wording and some slightly different emphasis here and there. Certainly the idea that the Tories wish to do away with the HRA and not replace it with something equivalent seems more paranoia than serious worry at this stage.

I also think that the UK government should take a more French attitude on “whether or not to suck up to America” – ie “no, unless there’s a big principle at stake which benefits our country”, rather than “yes, unless there’s a big principle at stake which benefits our country”.

Unless I’m missing something, the UK would have lost nothing by telling the US to fuck off re McKinnon, and it would have been a delightful moment for all Brits to celebrate – 9/11 killed American appeasement of the IRA, irrespective of how we treat idiots who hack computers.

Dan, you’re one of the smartest people I know. Where are you at here?

As far as I can see, GMcK was certainly guilty; that’s true. But he also did no harm (and yes, the Americans are fond of punishing the shit of people who did no harm, and if he wasn’t a silly sod then he wouldn’t have done the harmless things that he did, etc. See: Howard Marks).

But why should anyone who the UK government can avoid subjecting to US concepts of “justice” be subjected to such a thing; and why should we not follow the French example of telling the Americans to fuck off unless we need them?

If someone commits a crime overseas and is definitely guilty of it, it’s very difficult for any sort of Human Rights Act to stop him being extradited. Since Gary McKinnon’s entire case consisted of “I messed around with CIA computers but I don’t want to go to jail in America”, the real surprise is that it lasted as long as it did.

Did it stop the govt banging up suspected ‘terrorists’ without charge?

Yes.

The libservative agreement doesn’t mention IT access purposes. The anti-’kiddyprinting’ movement is against fingerprints being required for school libraries and meals.

and let home grown ones watch pornography in jail.

Wrong – Denis Nilsen’s case failed.

Should the HRA be abolished, I sincerely hope that you – and every other person who supports its abolition – end up falsely accused and convicted of a crime, locked up in prison, subjected to every abuse of power that the HRA has been used to protect people from, and unable to seek recourse by any means other than the 10-year process of petitioning the ECHR.

What? All the HRA seems to do is allow foreign criminals to avoid deportation, and let home grown ones watch pornography in jail. Did the HRA do anything to stop the extradition of Gary McKinnon? Did it stop the govt banging up suspected ‘terrorists’ without charge? Does it stop the police from using the anti-terrorist legislation on people taking pictures of various landmarks, or the police themselves? Has it stopped this country from becoming the most spied-on CCTV nation in the world? Did it stop the govt abusing our rights with regard to DNA retention? Would it have stopped ID cards? How about the Vetting and Barring Scheme whereby you can lose your job on the basis of hearsay evidence from persons unknown, with no right of appeal?

Has it buggery. Its just made a nice living for the Cherie Blairs of this world, lawyers sucking off the taxpayers teat taking criminals HRA cases to court. The rest of us law abiding citizens get no protection from the HRA from the previous govts Police State.

I for one will rejoice when it is condemned to the dustbin.