Iran called. You're guilty of unislamic behavior in the US/UK/anywhere. Please report to Teheran's Torture and Corrections department tomorrow... They too have extraterritorial laws, we should respect that, right? Hahaha.
particularly Norway, where one fifth of the child population is in State care
Your "research" is utter nonsense. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. As a Norwegian I had a good laugh at your expense!
To explain what teg (97890) referred to I'll translate the important part:
In 2010 almost 50 000 children, or 4 percent of Norway's youth population (ages 0-22 years), were recipients of care measures. Measures in this context includes assistance programmes including after school activities or holidays, offers of education or work, a separate home for young adults, or an extra "support family" for regular visits, financial assistance or even supervision of the home.
Removal from the home is the final resort, which you seem to have confused with care. Your confusion is natural as the British system is not very good or remotely comparable to Scandinavian systems, and your ignorance is probably linked to your attitude towards other Europeans.
Your "understanding" is probably based on the two recent Indian families that were prosecuted in Norwegian courts for their failure to treat their children properly. We don't want their children, you're just full of lies and groundless claims. The latest family physically hurt their son! What do you expect to happen? Their children are all in India now by the way. Why is that according to you?
Sweden's use of "häktning" has repeatedly been criticised on human rights grounds
Yes, criticised on the basis of the convention. It's a cause for concern, but it doesn't diminish the importance or value of the treaty in general or with regards to Swedish law. I'm also a Scandinavian (Norwegian/Swedish family) and a trained lawyer.
That you would attack the practice of "lay judges" surprises me! I find that it gives our system a democratic element without burdening the average citizen too much and avoids making a mockery of due process with American style juries. I think our system is excellent, full juries are not needed in courts of first instance. Are you Swedish by the way?
The presumption of innocence applies to the trial, not when gathering evidence. In the previous case for which he is serving time, he was awarded his freedom pre and post trial. He fled the country to escape justice afterwards! Now, they have every right to ensure he does not make arrangements to have evidence destroyed in the ongoing investigation [of the Logica case].
You may disagree with the conviction and the evidence in the previous trial, but it's a valid conviction as it stands. We have to respect the law and authority of Swedish courts.
There are very few countries in the world in general that use Common Law, it is however no requirement for a bill of rights or human rights. All European countries have equal protections [to the US Bill of Rights] and more by way of the European Convention on Human Rights.
What I find strange is that none of you considered the fact that he is convicted of the crime for which he is serving time. He subsequently fled the jurisdiction and is obviously not only a flight risk, has the ability to and great interest in destroying evidence against himself. It's perfectly understandable that the police would want him isolated.
Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights is a provision of the European Convention which protects the right to a fair trial. In criminal law cases and cases to determine civil rights it protects the right to a public hearing before an independent and impartial tribunal within reasonable time, the presumption of innocence, and other minimum rights for those charged in a criminal case (adequate time and facilities to prepare their defence, access to legal representation, right to examine witnesses against them or have them examined, right to the free assistance of an interpreter).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_6_of_the_European_Convention_on_Human_Rights
it is also a much broader legal principle that should be expected in any civilized legal system.
It is guaranteed by law in all European countries including Sweden.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_6_of_the_European_Convention_on_Human_Rights
It's not the case in European countries, the gift recipient obviously pays the gift tax. I think the anonymous comment is entirely wrong.
The EU doesn't write tax laws as Europe doesn't have a "federal" tax. We're still individual nations and taxes are national and local.
Europe is not one jurisdiction, we are still 50 separate countries, and 27 of those are within the European Union.
Those 27 countries have their own legal systems from British Common Law to German Civil Law. The EU is only a "federal" framework, the nations rule themselves. There are various forms of suits and some have "class action" options (see the EU and Collective Redress). Our national courts are far less willing or able to hand out billions of Euros. Tort in Europe in general does not result in huge personal gains.
In my jurisdiction you can only sue for actual financial losses, that were caused by the action in question. Your feelings are worthless, your lost income will be compensated, but mostly by existing public/private insurance. The difference between those figures is what the wrongdoer ends up paying.
That fact works in our citizens' favor. You can't sue your doctor or employer and expect to become a millionaire for either your own stupidity or actual wrong doing. You can have someone justly punished for their errors, but it's not about rewarding people. Doctors insurance is a lot less costly in European countries. You will be taken care of however no matter what the outcome.
Obviously it's a bit different with monopolies and price fixing, but the fines will go towards financing schools and roads etc. That's more in line with how European societies are organized.
The article doesn't tell you anything about the technology used or what development they've done. So I assume you don't know more than that? Could it possibly be that the concepts sound similar but the implementations are in fact different? Maybe there's more to this than simply claiming it's Zigbee in disguise. Who knows?
Ceefax was Teletext.
Teletext (or "broadcast teletext") is a television information retrieval service developed in the United Kingdom in the early 1970s. It offers a range of text-based information, typically including national, international and sporting news, weather and TV schedules. Subtitle (or closed captioning) information is also transmitted in the teletext signal.
I'm quite happy those days are over myself, the teletext subtitles were hardly perfect. They performed their function well enough, however the rendering, timing and positioning was often a problem.
In my opinion that sort of feature ought to be taken care of automatically by your viewing apparatus (TV, PC, phone or tablet). The information should either be available as a hidden data stream or interpreted live (speech-to-text). Subtitles should naturally adapt to your display's size and resolution, perhaps even your environment, and the font choice should be user customizable.
On the one hand the BBC isn't made for you specifically, it's supposed to be public broadcasting in the UK. On the other hand the BBC is one of the UK's greatest sources of influence and cultural distribution. The world has realized the potential and value, just look at the Arab world, Russia, France and China's recently launched English and/or multi-lingual offerings!
Act of war? Withdrawing from trade is not an act of war according to International Law, it may however become that.
To quote a learned source:
Sanctions seem to lend themselves well to international governance. They seem more substantial than mere diplomatic protests, yet they are politically less problematic
The economic sanctions may violate Just War principles:
They have the freedom to speak, they don't get private companies' services for free.
Unless they can pay for the services in question they have no right to complain. They're free to broadcast within their means.
Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey are part of "The West"?
As far as I can tell, unless you actually believe the biased and unreliable Russian sources, the weapons come from the above mentioned countries... That's hardly the United States and Europe, or "the West" as its collectively known.
The US claims that:
"The United States is not sending arms directly to the Syrian opposition. Instead, it is providing intelligence and other support for shipments of secondhand light weapons like rifles and grenades into Syria, mainly orchestrated from Saudi Arabia and Qatar. The reports indicate that the shipments organized from Qatar, in particular, are largely going to hard-line Islamists."
Here in Norway you can now add QR codes to your tombstone with a link to a dedication website. I think the idea is "popular" in the US as well, I don't know who came up with the idea.
An adequate bootstrap is a contradiction in terms.
