|
| Welcome to Religious Forums |
| Welcome Guest to ReligiousForums.com . You are currently not registered. When you become registered you will be able to interact with our large base of already registered users discussing topics. Some annoying Ads will also disappear when you register. Registering doesn't cost a thing and only takes a few seconds. We provide areas to chat and debate all World Religions. Please go to our register page! |
|
|||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
10-22-2005, 07:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Head Of The Anglican Church, Head Of The New Holly Inquisition?
The revelation that the House of Lords operate under evidence gathered under torture, is an indication that Queen Elizabeth II, "protector of the people and defender of the faith" might become he head of a world wide holly inquisition.
"MI5 'acts on facts gained under torture' London Telegraph | October 21 2005 By Duncan Gardham The head of MI5 has submitted evidence to the House of Lords indicating that her agents are prepared to act on intelligence obtained under torture in the fight against terrorism." http://www.infowars.com/articles/ps/...om_torture.htm 
|
|
#2
10-23-2005, 03:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
They were not being used against a particular religion, unless you claim that it is Islam that is fighting these terrorist wars. I do not believe that. I have studied Islam with devout Moslems, and it is a beautiful peaceful religion. You should support any move to eliminate these vermin who are masquerading as Moslems but really are just murderers of innocent men women and children.
|
|
#3
10-24-2005, 06:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#4
10-25-2005, 09:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#5
10-25-2005, 09:56 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Courts 'must oppose torture', law lords told By Joshua Rozenberg, Legal Editor (Filed: 18/10/2005) Courts "should set their face against torture and the fruits of torture", seven law lords were told yesterday. The claim, which is opposed by the Government, was made on behalf of 10 suspected foreign terrorists. They claim that, in deciding to detain them, the Home Secretary was not entitled to rely on information obtained by foreign intelligence agencies through torture. Ben Emmerson, QC, for the detainees - most of whom are Algerian - said Britain now exchanged intelligence information with states that practised torture. He wants the seven judges to rule that evidence obtained through torture cannot be used in legal proceedings. But Ian Burnett, QC, for the Home Secretary, maintained that there was no rule of law preventing a court from relying on statements of a third party obtained by agents of a foreign state through torture. Mr Emmerson admitted that English law allowed the authorities to make operational use of information obtained through torture. If the police were to beat a confession out of a kidnapper, forcing him to reveal the location of his victim, it would be lawful for other officers to rescue the victim even though the confession could not be used against the kidnapper in court. The QC was responding to a question by Lord Nicholls, who wanted to know why it was inappropriate for one arm of the state, a court, to rely on torture when this was acceptable for another arm of the state, the minister. Mr Burnett, for Charles Clarke, argued that such a "mismatch" between what the executive might do and how it could justify its conduct to a court was unprincipled, leading to "absurd" results. Mr Emmerson was supported by 14 human rights organisations. Keir Starmer, QC, for the 14, will argue that international agreements impose absolute obligations on states to prevent torture. The 10 former detainees are challenging a decision of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission, upheld by a majority of two to one in the Court of Appeal last year. The hearing before the law lords is expected to end tomorrow, with judgment reserved. law@telegraph.co.uk  13 October 2005: Terror Bill 'too weak to prevent human rights challenge'  © Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2005. Terms & Conditions of reading. Commercial information. Privacy and Cookie Policy.
__________________
My life is an open book; if you don't like the read, put me back on the shelf ....................
|
|
#6
10-25-2005, 01:45 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Holy Inquisition, holy!
 (Not that I don't like the idea of a holly one.) Oppose torture at all costs. It destroys not only the person being tortured, but the person having to do it.
__________________
|
|
#7
10-25-2005, 01:49 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
My life is an open book; if you don't like the read, put me back on the shelf ....................
|
|
#8
10-25-2005, 01:56 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
-- pending further review --
|
|
#9
10-25-2005, 02:03 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
As far as is known, no british institution uses or allows torture.
This does not mean that information given by another state, who does use torture should not be followed up. If evidence is gained by investigating and following up such information, Then the evidence gained is legitimate, for use in any way required. Simply because a state, might some times, use torture does not prohibit the use of the information they give. This in no way ever legitamises the use of torture. Terry_____________________________- Amen! Truly I say to you: Gather in my name. I am with you.
|
|
#10
10-25-2005, 02:24 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Except that my reason is that I've only known one person named Holly, and she was a fruitcake. (And being one myself, I know of what I speak!)
__________________
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
...Mad Brain Surgeon!...
Linear Mode
