.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
rockingrobin
-
Posts
1,689 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by rockingrobin
-
-
28 minutes ago, billd766 said:
Are you saying that it is all lies then?
Could seach for the real truth and come back with figures that are different and actually refute the post, or are you simply dismissing the post as a fake without checking?
The e-mail first originated in Canada around 2004 , and as subsequently done the rounds in Australia and UK , the contents are easily dismissed as the author doesnt appear to be able to differentiatei between illegal immigrants and refugees.
Ignoring the figures quoted , maybe somebody could explain how an illegal alien , who by there very nature is not in the system successfully managers to apply and recieve government assistance.
https://fullfact.org/news/are-illegal-immigrants-eligible-over-four-times-more-state-aid-pensioners/
-
14 minutes ago, nontabury said:
Could this be possible true in the U.K.
STATE PENSION - keep this going please
Read and pass on:
Dear Prime Minister The RT. Hon. David Cameron, MP.
I wish to ask you a Question:- "Is This True?"
I refer to the Pension Reality Check.Are you aware of the following ?
The British Government provides the following financial assistance:-
BRITISH OLD AGED PENSIONER
(bearing in mind they worked hard and paid their Income Tax and National
Insurance contributions to the British Government all their working life)
Weekly allowance: £106.00IMMIGRANTS/REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
(No Income Tax and National Insurance contribution whatsoever)
Weekly allowance: £250.00BRITISH OLD AGED PENSIONER
Weekly Spouse Allowance: £25.00ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS/REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
Weekly Spouse Allowance: £225.00BRITISH OLD AGED PENSIONER
Additional Weekly Hardship Allowance: £0.00ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS/REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
Additional Weekly Hardship Allowance: £100.00A British old age pensioner is no less hard up than an illegal immigrant/refugee yet receives nothing
BRITISH OLD AGED PENSIONER
TOTAL YEARLY BENEFIT: £6,000ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS/REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
TOTAL YEARLY BENEFIT: £29,900Please read all and then forward to all your contacts so that we can lobby for a decent state pension.
After all, the average pensioner has paid taxes and contributed to the growth of this country for the last 40 to 60 years.
Sad isn't it? Surely it's about time we put our own people first.Please have the guts to forward this. or copy an paste
I JUST DID!
This is just a rehash of the fake e-mail doing the rounds a number of years ago. .
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, aslimversgwm said:
Processing data and the details in the link you include is not connected with sharing data. It is guidance for those wishing to hold and record personal data on individuals. I had to understand this when I worked as an IT consultant advising businesses on their legal obligations as regards the 'processing ' and storage of said data. Sharing data even within an organisation let alone with another organisation be it a business or a government department is not permitted except with the individual involved or if it is subject to a criminal investigation.
Here is the link again https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/conditions-for-processing/
If we look at the example quoted it is clear that a company can pass on personal data to a third party so long as there is a legitimate aim, fair and lawfull
'
Example
A finance company is unable to locate a customer who has stopped making payments under a hire purchase agreement. The customer has moved house without notifying the finance company of his new address. The finance company engages a debt collection agency to find the customer and seek repayment of the debt. It discloses the customer’s personal data to the agency for this purpose. Although the customer has not consented to this disclosure, it is made for the purposes of the finance company’s legitimate interests – ie to recover the debt.
-
8 hours ago, aslimversgwm said:
My point is - as I noted be4 - data is sent to the Home Office and can not be shared with other government departments under the Data Protection Act - and it is collected only as a means of controlling, or attempting to control, people over-staying on their UK visas and keeping track of known terrorists or people of that ilk. It isn't being used to check on British Citizens who don't need visas or are security threats!
The Data Protction Act consists of 8 principles and does not prohibit the sharing of information , (processing) ,
One of the conditions for processing is
' The processing is necessary for administering justice, or for exercising statutory, governmental, or other public functions '
https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/conditions-for-processing/
-
8 hours ago, JHolmesJr said:
the fact that a bezos owned rag rags on the president is the pertinent story here. Rest is for another thread. Stay on topic please.
I see it differently, if the article is correct in context
The POTUS disclosed security intelligence that compromised its source, that means 1 of two things
Either the POTUS did not realise the ramifications of such disclosure , in which case he should not be in possesion of such info, or he was aware of the consequences and wished the source to be revealed
-
8 hours ago, Formaleins said:
He is still a British Citizen and has rights. Just because he has been out of the country does not deny him his rights. He probably paid taxes for years, and being abroad he obviously hasn't been milking the system unlike a lot of the VERMIN that are being given a free pass to every quick buck and freebie there is to offer, that are being shat all over the UK like mouse crap.
However he is subject to the law
-
1 hour ago, Opl said:
" The French press is showing the corporate US media how it should be done, as they have imposed a voluntary blackout on the Russian Macron campaign email hack until after the election."
"Journalists could face criminal charges for violating laws preventing influence on vote" ( Vitali Kremez, director of research with US-based cyber intelligence firm Flashpoint, told Reuters APT 28, a group tied to Russia’s military intelligence directorate, was behind the leak.)
14 minutes ago, alocacoc said:The press wouldn't anyway report about the content of the leaked documents. Well, let the French elect a Rothschild puppet. Good luck with that.
It appears the leaks are fake, possibly designed by the Macron team to defeat fancy bears. Wikileaks now expressing doubts
-
4 minutes ago, Loaded said:
The EU is a customs union but the UK will not be in the EU customs union so trade between the UK and EU will be bound by WTO rules.
Exactly, I dont understand what you are saying.
At present the UK is in the customs union, upon leaving and operating under WTO it cannot be the same as prior
-
1 hour ago, Loaded said:
We will always have access to the single market. As the EU and UK (founding member and still current member) are members of the WTO. WTO rules prevent the EU from excluding UK imports. The EU will be prevented from setting punitive tariffs against UK imports because according to the schedules they trade under at the WTO, they cannot exceed their maximum stated tariff (boundary tariff) plus if they impose a boundary tariff on one country, they must impose on all countries - this isn't going to happen. It's likely that the EU will be forced to continue trading with the UK under their current tariff IE no tariff - until they submit new schedules. The UK will be free to set tariffs that best suit their trading policy.
The EU as a customs union is as such not strictly bound by WTO rules on MFN
-
21 minutes ago, nontabury said:
This is because on the continent the vehicle owner is held responsible,unlike in the UK,where it's the driver who is responsible. So I don't think this is an insomountable problem. All it needs is determination on the part of the British authorities. Similar to the fact that while the UK pays 100's of millions of £'s to continental countries,for medical treatment to UK citizens. The UK authorities fail to charge or claim for medical treatment obtained by other EU countries.
In the UK the vehicle owner will be sent a NIP and required to declare the driver at the time of offence .
-
38 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:
Not necessarily as it would be obvious that the UK would have to pay its 'dues' until the actual leave date two years later.
The argument is now about whether the UK must pay for ongoing costs of projects started whilst the UK was still a 'full' member (i.e. before article 50 was enacted) and pension commitments for all EU politicians/admin staff etc.?
The question is , does Art50 contract the parties out of customary international law. I would expect if the UK and EU cannot agree, they will go to arbitration.
-
11 minutes ago, dunroaming said:
Of course the EU are trying to influence the UK election. Like any hostile divorce each side would like to see the other at a dis-advantage. If Le Pen were to win the French election then that would see the death of the EU whereas a Macron win would give them a much needed boost. No doubt they will trying to influence that result as well.
This could work in May's favour as the Brits don't like to feel they are being manipulated
Its irrational, the general election is not close, T.May was in control of the timing of Art50 notification, calling a GE, and dinner invite to juncker.
Its typical how T.May operates , the need to focus on an enemy
-
' "Britain's negotiating position in Europe has been misrepresented in the continental press ... '
Why does T.May not give her account of the meeting, thereby allowing us all to make a judgement
-
11 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:
I agree, but in this case its entirely the fault of EU politicians for continually stating (and increasing....) the amount the UK must pay to leave....
Only May can 'win' when the eventual figure is far lower - not the EU politicians making up these numbers!
The 100b figure was an analysis by the FT, modelled on assumptions based upon EU criteria to be negotiated and did not include any rebates, etc
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:
Sadly, IMO politicians have little/no interest in reforming the EU, and even less interest in leaving - unless suddenly forced to change by a shock result such as the brexit vote. Only then do they realise that they've pushed the electorate too far and, for the sake of their career, its time to change tactics....
After all, its part of 'the club' from which they personally benefit via positions within 'big business' and the EU itself.
Even so, to date the EU hasn't even mentioned reform - preferring to rely on frightening the population into submission. Hence the ridiculous 'negotiating list' and the 'leak' about Juncker's dinner with May - from which it is concluded (by remain supporting media, and of course, unthinking remainers) that May is delusional - for stating the obvious....
How about the multi speed europe
-
3 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:
I gather the EU has now increased its 'divorce bill' to 100 bn - and they think that May/the UK is delusional
!
Its becoming ever more obvious that EU politicians think that coming up with increasing. ridiculous demands is going to 'win the day'...
Why are they unable to recognise that the populace are very unhappy about various elements of the EU itself - and addressing these grievances would be far more beneficial?
Edit - Don't answer that, it was a rhetorical question, and I know the answer
.
The EU have not arrived at any figures for the supposed divorce bill. The amounts being talked about are speculation based on economic modelling
-
This doesnt look very promising
http://citywire.co.uk/new-model-adviser/news/government-delays-state-pension-age-decision/a1012308
The government has delayed making a decision about the future of the state pension age (SPA) until after the general election in June.
-
36 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:
The UK courts was in control and his deportation blocked by SIAC and appeals court in 2013
31 minutes ago, vogie said:Is that the court thats in Strasbourg?
The SIAC ,Special Immigration Appeals Commission
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/appeal-to-the-special-immigration-appeals-commission
Timeline of events, not complete
Jan 2012 EHRC prevents deportation
April 2012 a fresh attempt to deport is halted by ECHR
May 2012 ECHR reject Abu Qatada appeal
Nov 2012 SIAC block deportation
May 2013 Appeal Court reject government attempt to deport
July 2013 Qatada voluntary leaves
-
16 minutes ago, vogie said:
Don't you think it should be up to Britain who has the right to decide, do other countrys know whats best for us, any threat to our country should be up to our elected leaders, not some unelected beaurocrat in Brussels.
The UK courts was in control and his deportation blocked by SIAC and appeals court in 2013
-
29 minutes ago, vogie said:
What is your country? When Theresa May was home secretary she (and six other home secretarys) tried to remove Abu Qatada from the UK for having links to terrorists organisations, the EU said it infringed his human rights, they were not bothered about the rights of the British people. It took 8 years to get rid of this parasite.
Your assertion that the EU prevented the deportation of Abu Qatada is incorrect, it was the ECHR , which found that a right to a fair trial would be breached due to Jordans use of evidence gained by torture being admitted from one of his co-defendents
-
10 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:
This is not down to the fault of the workers. Management, whoever that may be, has failed to implement the risk analysis system.
http://www.politico.eu/article/uk-faces-e2-billion-eu-payment-for-china-fraud-trade/
-
Just now, dick dasterdly said:
Which brings me back to why didn't the Chinese criminal gangs use other (more obviously corrupt) countries as the 'soft target' to bring in clothes/shoes etc.?
Or is the EU just trying to come up with another reason to claim that the UK will have to pay a lot of money to leave the EU?
' The Brussels-based agency accused Britain of turning a blind eye to Chinese scammers when several other EU member states had taken firm action '
http://www.dw.com/en/britain-owes-eu-billions-due-to-customs-fraud/a-37853852
-
Just now, dick dasterdly said:
The UK isn't known as being the 'soft underbelly' of the EU - so is the article saying that UK customs officers are fraudulently (and illegally) allowing in huge quantities of etc. etc.?
Possible I suppose, but wouldn't the Chinese be better off using an EU country known to be corrupt?
Background
-
On 4/8/2017 at 10:15 AM, Rajab Al Zarahni said:
Here is a link for checking the coverage of the frozen pensions debate on the BBC.
BBC Parliament does broadcast live coverage of the debates that take place within the House of Commons and I would recommend that you keep an eye on the network's schedule pages for details of when the debate is due to begin. You can find these pages at:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcparliament/programmes/schedules/2017/04/15
With a GE almost a certainty for 8th June , does anybody know when parliament will be dissolved , will it be before or after this debate
!
.
UK pensions
in Home Country Forum
Posted
The fake e-mail is old, , why not go to the HoC library link from the full fact website I posted, which gives more details