29-09-2019, 04:13 PM
41
Re: Katie Hopkins in the Supreme Court
Originally Posted by AnnieS
->
I can't find a source that says all these people are paid by the EU. Does anyone have it?
Paid for or just hugely biased towards the EU? Is there a difference? As posted elsewhere:
Lord Kerr
He was a member of the European Convention that first drafted what became Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty,
He was Ambassador and UK Permanent Representative to the European Communities/European Union in Brussels from 1990 until 1995
Speaking at an event organised by the Institute for Government, Lord Kerr said:
"In my view, immigration is the thing that keeps this country running. We native Brits are so bloody stupid that we need an injection of intelligent people, young people from outside who come in and wake us up from time to time."
In response to the remarks, Peter Lilley MP (a Eurosceptic Conservative) walked out of the event, and said he had considered reporting the peer to the police for hate speech and being "racially abusive of the British people".
Robert Reed, Lord Reed
"Serves as one of the UK's ad hoc judges at the European Court of Human Rights. Between 2002 and 2004, he was an expert advisor to the EU/Council of Europe Joint Initiative with Turkey"
Philip Sales, Lord Sales
"At the time of the appointment, there was debate over Sales' appointment. According to The Guardian, an anonymous source referred to 11KBW as a "network of old boys and cronies", and that there was "no coincidence that the appointment came from Lord Irvine's and Tony Blair's old chambers". Acting as a barrister Sales defended the New Labour government's decision against holding a public inquiry into the Iraq War in the High Court in 2005.
In October 2016 Sales was one of the three judges forming the divisional court of the High Court in proceedings concerning the use of the royal prerogative for the issue of notification in accordance with Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union, R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union. His role in this judgment meant that he appeared in an infamous front-cover of the Daily Mail (Enemies of the People).
etc etc etc
29-09-2019, 05:02 PM
42
Re: Katie Hopkins in the Supreme Court
Originally Posted by AidoPotato
->
Well then leavers are clearly unable to distinguish the difference in importance between not taking the thrash out when they said they would, and saving the British population from an EU exit voted by an overwhelming minority of the British population.The true reason for the frustration Dodge is that most leavers who do not stand to make any financial gain from leaving the EU have been brainwashed. It's almost like a kid who has been allowed a load of sweets for 3 years is finally being told that they are seriously bad for them, and so the candy is being confiscated for the good of the kid.
And the kid throws a tantrum. There will be a 2+ year extension and it's time leavers got used to it. It is for the greater good of the British population.
Here comes the same BS about leavers worried about the financial impact of brexit. Leavers know there will be a financial hit when the UK leaves the EU, that is a given BUT what many fail to understand because they refuse to understand or even contemplate the reasons why is that leavers were initially angry at the EU for meddling in UK affairs, two reasons specifically, allow other EU fishing nations exclusive access to UK fishing waters whereas the UK is restricted heavily from fishing in other EU nations waters and secondly, to allow UK prisoners the right to vote, as per ruling by the European Court of Human Rights.
There has been a 3rd issue that has slowly been rumbling on in the background and that is migration of EU people from poorer EU countries who were allowed entry into the EU. Numerous poor European countries were given entry in to the EU and one of them in particular, Poland, flooded the UK with it's people, taking cheap work and accessing UK benefits. The UK complained to the EU but the EU said Poland was now a member of the EU and therefore it's people are now under the protection of EU laws, that includes freedom of movement.
What hit the nail on the head was the EU allowing Romania entry into the EU in 2007, one of the poorest countries within Europe and the UK government knew exactly what was going to happen, under freedom of movement laws, the majority of Romanians were going to head to the UK and they was right.
The UK prisons are mainly filled with criminals from eastern European countries that were allowed entry into the UK, a fact which the justice department has figures on. The unwanted from many European countries now reside in the UK and due to freedom of movement laws for EU citizens, there is nothing the UK can do about it.
There is a saying that things always fall to that of the lowest denominator and that is what is happening to the UK, social standards have dropped, living standards have dropped, quality of work has dropped but there is no way politicians are ever going to admit to that because they do not want to upset their EU partners.
Basically, leavers can go on and on about the problems the UK is having but out of it comes two very clear reasons for why leavers want the UK out of the EU 1) to take back control of it's borders, to decide who is allowed and not allowed in and 2) control of it's laws instead of them being undermined by EU human rights laws (murderers, rapists from other EU countries being told they cannot be deported back to their own country because it breaches their human rights).
This is why leavers want the UK out of the EU. The rest is just hogwash drummed up by biased politicians and pro-remainers.
29-09-2019, 06:42 PM
44
Re: Katie Hopkins in the Supreme Court
Originally Posted by Dodge
->
You truly have no idea about the minds of leavers do you. You also do not understand what the true value of 'commitment' means hence the ridiculing of my comment about 'taking out the trash'. Here comes the same BS about leavers worried about the financial impact of brexit. Leavers know there will be a financial hit when the UK leaves the EU, that is a given BUT what many fail to understand because they refuse to understand or even contemplate the reasons why is that leavers were initially angry at the EU for meddling in UK affairs, two reasons specifically, allow other EU fishing nations exclusive access to UK fishing waters whereas the UK is restricted heavily from fishing in other EU nations waters and secondly, to allow UK prisoners the right to vote, as per ruling by the European Court of Human Rights.
There has been a 3rd issue that has slowly been rumbling on in the background and that is migration of EU people from poorer EU countries who were allowed entry into the EU. Numerous poor European countries were given entry in to the EU and one of them in particular, Poland, flooded the UK with it's people, taking cheap work and accessing UK benefits. The UK complained to the EU but the EU said Poland was now a member of the EU and therefore it's people are now under the protection of EU laws, that includes freedom of movement.
What hit the nail on the head was the EU allowing Romania entry into the EU in 2007, one of the poorest countries within Europe and the UK government knew exactly what was going to happen, under freedom of movement laws, the majority of Romanians were going to head to the UK and they was right.
The UK prisons are mainly filled with criminals from eastern European countries that were allowed entry into the UK, a fact which the justice department has figures on. unwanted from many European countries now reside in the UK and due to freedom of movement laws for EU citizens, there is nothing the UK can do about it.
There is a saying that things always fall to that of the lowest denominator and that is what is happening to the UK, social standards have dropped, living standards have dropped, quality of work has dropped but there is no way politicians are ever going to admit to that because they do not want to upset their EU partners.
Basically, leavers can go on and on about the problems the UK is having but out of it comes two very clear reasons for why leavers want the UK out of the EU 1) to take back control of it's borders, to decide who is allowed and not allowed in and 2) control of it's laws instead of them being undermined by EU human rights laws (murderers, rapists from other EU countries being told they cannot be deported back to their own country because it breaches their human rights).
This is why leavers want the UK out of the EU. The rest is just hogwash drummed up by biased politicians and pro-remainers.
https://fullfact.org/crime/eu-prisoners/
EU nationals make up 5% of or prison population which is the same Ratio of EU nationals in the UK
So our prisons are not overflowing with Eastern European’s and either you’ve fallen for the fake news propagated by the various leave and alt right websites or or you have racist views towards Eastern European’s and Romanians in particular as your stereotyping of Eastern European’s as murderers and rapists certainly implies
29-09-2019, 07:55 PM
45
Re: Katie Hopkins in the Supreme Court
Originally Posted by Realist
->
Paid for or just hugely biased towards the EU? Is there a difference? As posted elsewhere:Lord Kerr
He was a member of the European Convention that first drafted what became Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty,
He was Ambassador and UK Permanent Representative to the European Communities/European Union in Brussels from 1990 until 1995
Speaking at an event organised by the Institute for Government, Lord Kerr said:
"In my view, immigration is the thing that keeps this country running. We native Brits are so bloody stupid that we need an injection of intelligent people, young people from outside who come in and wake us up from time to time."
In response to the remarks, Peter Lilley MP (a Eurosceptic Conservative) walked out of the event, and said he had considered reporting the peer to the police for hate speech and being "racially abusive of the British people".
Robert Reed, Lord Reed
"Serves as one of the UK's ad hoc judges at the European Court of Human Rights. Between 2002 and 2004, he was an expert advisor to the EU/Council of Europe Joint Initiative with Turkey"
Philip Sales, Lord Sales
"At the time of the appointment, there was debate over Sales' appointment. According to The Guardian, an anonymous source referred to 11KBW as a "network of old boys and cronies", and that there was "no coincidence that the appointment came from Lord Irvine's and Tony Blair's old chambers". Acting as a barrister Sales defended the New Labour government's decision against holding a public inquiry into the Iraq War in the High Court in 2005.
In October 2016 Sales was one of the three judges forming the divisional court of the High Court in proceedings concerning the use of the royal prerogative for the issue of notification in accordance with Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union, R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union. His role in this judgment meant that he appeared in an infamous front-cover of the Daily Mail (Enemies of the People).
etc etc etc
Now as you are someone who respects our constitution I'm surprised you were not for the verdict.
2. I'm still waiting for some proof that these judges were paid some sort of bribe by the EU for making this ruling. Because I can't find any evidence.
Just because they have professional links to the EU doesn't mean anything. Most legal professionals of that stature are going to have some history of international law. I'm sure there's more in their CVs than just the EU. It's grasping at straws and making sensationalist claims that are purely anarchic rather than factual.
I still can't believe people want to reject the checks and balances we have in place to stop Government becoming a runaway train.
29-09-2019, 10:13 PM
46
Re: Katie Hopkins in the Supreme Court
Originally Posted by AnnieS
->
1. I can't see how this proves the judges are biased. The Supreme court is made up of 12 judges. Eleven presided over the hearing and they all agreed on the verdict. The high court did not rule against it on the basis that Boris is allowed a certain amount of political slack to do willy nilly. But the supreme court considered the proroguing unjustified. It is clearly not standard practice to close parliament for five weeks. To do so was unconstitutional.Now as you are someone who respects our constitution I'm surprised you were not for the verdict.
2. I'm still waiting for some proof that these judges were paid some sort of bribe by the EU for making this ruling. Because I can't find any evidence.
Just because they have professional links to the EU doesn't mean anything. Most legal professionals of that stature are going to have some history of international law. I'm sure there's more in their CVs than just the EU. It's grasping at straws and making sensationalist claims that are purely anarchic rather than factual.
I still can't believe people want to reject the checks and balances we have in place to stop Government becoming a runaway train.
unable to move in any direction but makes a lot of noise!
It seems the checks and balances you speak of are heavily
weighted in favour of the minority! Why the reluctance to have
an early nelection? Are you scared the majority will bspeak again?
Regards Donkeyman!
29-09-2019, 10:14 PM
47
Re: Katie Hopkins in the Supreme Court
Originally Posted by Donkeyman
->
We now have a stationary train with a burst boiler that isunable to move in any direction but makes a lot of noise!
It seems the checks and balances you speak of are heavily
weighted in favour of the minority! Why the reluctance to have
an early nelection? Are you scared the majority will bspeak again?
Regards Donkeyman!
29-09-2019, 11:06 PM
48
Re: Katie Hopkins in the Supreme Court
Originally Posted by AnnieS
->
My only worry about an early election is Corbyn getting into No.10. I can't think of anything worse.
Corbyn is soon to be wiped out at that very election?
What grounds do have for thinking hes got any chance??
Donkeyman!
29-09-2019, 11:13 PM
49
Re: Katie Hopkins in the Supreme Court
Originally Posted by Donkeyman
->
You seem to worry about everything AnnieS?Corbyn is soon to be wiped out at that very election?
What grounds do have for thinking hes got any chance??
Donkeyman!
Anyway, I admire your optimism. But the tory vote will be split by the brexit party. The brexit party won't win because of their lack of actual policies. It's all a bit of a car crash.
29-09-2019, 11:15 PM
50
Re: Katie Hopkins in the Supreme Court
Originally Posted by AnnieS
->
My only worry about an early election is Corbyn getting into No.10. I can't think of anything worse.
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
