Stephen Mullen

Web designer, civil rights activist, anti-fascist and Liberal Democrat

February 15, 2009
by Stephen
0 comments

Counter Demo against the BNP march in Liverpool on March 14th

The BNP have called a march in Liverpool on 14th March. They have never had a March in a major British city before. Last time they brought up around 60 members, including Nick Griffin, it is anticipated that they will number around 600 that day.

Merseyside Coalition against Racism and Fascism has called a counter demo alongside the TUC. We hope to bring as many anti-Fascists to the city on that day. We hope to raise awareness of the issue and send a message out that they are not welcome in our community.

For more information go to:
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=127374645726

December 20, 2006
by Stephen
0 comments

Freedom of thought is a ‘limited right’ says PM

In a response to a petition on the PM’s website calling for the “halt to the erosion of civil liberties and rights,” the Prime Minister’s Office responded saying that “The majority of the Convention rights are, however, limited or qualified. Examples of these rights include: the right to respect for private and family life; and the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. Limited and qualified Convention rights can be restricted.”

So after they’ve taken the rest of my civil liberties will the government be sending round the thought police to make sure I’m not thinking any “terrorist thoughts”? I’m sure I accidentally thought of a few just reading the PM’s statement.

I’d ask if Tony Blair has a conscience about removing people’s civil liberties, but it appears he has limited his right to one.

The full response from the PM to the petition can be found below and at
http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page10666.asp
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/liberty/

Thank you for your petition dated 16 November entitled “Halt the erosion of civil liberties and rights”

Human rights belong to everyone in the United Kingdom and give a very important means of protection for all. The Human Rights Act puts public authorities including Government, hospitals and social services under an obligation to treat people with fairness, equality, dignity and respect. It ensures a level of service below which no public authority should fall. The Act offers a way to tackle problems including substandard care and poor service. You are given added protection by the Act allowing you, as a last resort, to bring a case against a public authority in a UK court.

The Act secures a fair balance between the general interests of society and the protection of the fundamental rights of each individual. Everyone has the benefit of the rights and freedoms protected by the Human Rights Act. Only a few of the rights protected by the Human Rights Act are absolute. They include protection against torture, slavery and retrospective criminal penalties. The Government believes that these rights should be absolute in recognition that such treatment can never be justified in a civilised, democratic society, even where the person seeking to rely on their human rights has committed a crime.

The majority of the Convention rights are, however, limited or qualified. Examples of these rights include: the right to respect for private and family life; and the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. Limited and qualified Convention rights can be restricted. The types of reasons the state can give for interfering with the individual’s rights include: the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country; for the prevention of disorder or crime; for the protection of health or morals; or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. The more serious the threat is to the general public interest, the more stringent the measures are that can be justified.

Criminals do not always have the unrestricted right to the freedoms contained in the Human Rights Act. Indeed the Act specifically stipulates that people convicted of crimes can be deprived of their liberty and should not be released from prison early if they present a serious danger to others. Those who have no right to reside in the UK can be detained to prevent them entering the country while steps are taken to deport them.

The petition states that we are sacrificing the rights of British Citizens by altering anti-terror legislation. The UK has been subject to a sustained campaign of terrorism for more than 30 years – initially emanating from Northern Ireland but now more international in character – and this experience has shown how the balance between necessary legislation and protecting human rights can be struck.

We have managed to achieve the appropriate balance between the measures necessary to deal with the very real threat to national security posed by terrorism, and the need to avoid diminishing the civil and human rights of the population. All of our anti-terrorism measures have to be sent in the context of our general commitment to human rights and the protection of individual freedoms, including the enactment of the Human Rights Act 1998 which made the rights enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) enforceable in domestic courts.

October 12, 2006
by Stephen
0 comments

Speech at the Rally against Jack Straw’s comments on the Veil

As we all know Jack Straw is an idiot, who in a desperate attempt to get noticed enough to get elected as Deputy Leader of the Labour Party decided to up the ante against John Reid (who also appears to covet the job) on who can be the most anti-Muslim.

Jack Straw knew full well the implications of what he said and yet opened his mouth anyway. Since his comments there have been a number of attacks on Muslim women who wear the veil and I fear there could be many more as the government uses Muslims as scapegoats to hide the government’s failed policies.

I was invited to speak at the rally on Saturday, 7th October, 2006. I’ve posted my speech below.

Speech at the Rally against Jack Straw’s comments on the Veil

I’d like to thank you for inviting me to speak here today.

This issue doesn’t just effect Muslim women; it effects people of all religions and those of no religion.

It is the fundamental right to choose what you wear and the right to be properly represented by your member of parliament.

Should Christians, Jews, Sikhs and those of other faiths remove their religious attire when speaking to their MP for fear of offending them?

Just as women should be free to wear short skirts, they should also have the right to cover themselves up.

No man should have the right to tell a woman what she should or shouldn’t wear. Not her husband, her brother or father, and certainly not her member of parliament.

It’s THEIR choice, not ours.

Is Jack Straw telling us that his colleague David Blunkett does not represent his constituents properly because he cannot see any of their faces?

I wonder if all the members of the British public a wearing a metaphorical veil where this government is concerned, whether it’s Iraq, erosion of civil liberties, education or health. Is that the government’s excuse for Iraq – that they didn’t see the expressions on the faces of the dying children.

Read my lips Jack Straw, racism is not acceptable. Not from the Labour Party and not from the BNP.