Imperial Party forum

thomas davison

Human rights are a threat to free speech. This has never been clearer, since the breathtaking attempt by the judges to gag the reporting of Parliament. What sort of mind comes up with this tyrannical idea, and sees it as an acceptable price to pay for covering up the misdeeds of nauseatingly rich celebrities?
It is suddenly, terrifyingly plain that the Human Rights judges instinctively loathe proper British liberty. The new dogma of Human Rights gives them a mighty weapon against it, which they now feel strong enough to use.

It has always been hard to fight against Human Rights because the phrase sounds so nice. Who could oppose such a wonderful thing? But now we know why we should oppose it in one important detail. If the alleged �right� to privacy is so powerful that it trumps the freedom to report parliamentary proceedings, then we are better off without such a right.
Every single one of these rights can be interpreted in some similar twisted way. And for too long we have failed to notice the nasty revolutionary origins and the nasty purpose of this noble-sounding idea.
Human Rights, closely related to the ideas behind the bloodthirsty, ruthless revolutions in France and Russia, are now being used to give our own Left-wing elite the power to override a thousand years of tradition, national independence and freedom, in the name of something that sounds noble but is in fact sordid and ugly.
In the past 30 years I can think of only one instance � a group of railwaymen who refused to be forced into a union closed shop � where Human Rights have been used in the interests of real freedom. In many other cases, the Human Rights Act has been deployed to reduce the freedoms of the hard-working, the tax-paying and the law-abiding.
The rights asserted have been those of lawbreakers trying to avoid justice, illegal immigrants trying to avoid deportation for criminal acts, prisoners trying to win votes and similar unpopular and unwanted changes for the worse in our way of life.
If Christianity is being sidelined, marriage reduced to the level of any other sexual relationship, Britain being pressed to adapt to immigrants rather than the other way round, extreme feminism imposed on workplaces, schools compelled to re-admit trouble-making pupils, Human Rights will be involved.
Real rights and freedoms are not like this. Our British Great Charters, Claims and Bills of Rights do one simple thing � tell the Government what it cannot do. These are in truth the only rights worth having.
But it has become deeply unfashionable to say so. In fact, the elite has become so committed to this unpleasant dogma that opposition to it is viewed as wicked.
People like me � though still allowed to speak � are allowed on to mainstream national broadcasting only under strict conditions: that we are �balanced� by at least three other people who disagree with us so that our views, actually held by millions, are made to look like an eccentric minority opinion.
In some cases, newspapers, once open to our views, are pressured into silencing our voices. Our books, if we can get them published, are not reviewed. The major political parties won�t select us as candidates. And so on.
No, of course, it is not as bad as being arrested and locked up � though in modern Britain it is increasingly possible to have your collar felt for expressing an unfashionable opinion.
But it is without doubt an attack on our freedom of speech � which is of little value if millions never hear what we say � while our opponents are not restricted in the same way.
Now that we see Human Rights openly employed in a direct attempt to gag MPs and reporters, perhaps others will begin to wonder if the great liberal revolution is as good and kind as it claims to be