kingdong

On 3/4/2021 at 2:03 AM, vogie said:

So the convenor of the enquiry Fabiani is an SNP mp and a friend of NS, she came to the rescue of Sturgeon when she was againgst the ropes being pressed by Baillie. Has NS always had these memory lapses, "I cannot recall, not to my recollection, I don't know" 

There was so much evidence missing, it stinks to high heaven. 

 

 

 

More holes than a string vest

12 hours ago, 7by7 said:

This is not a valid point; the issue has nothing to do with the EU.

 

A member state's courts are, and always have been, independent of the EU. Except for matters relating to EU rules and regulations which individuals or member governments can, after the case has been heard in the member state's highest court, take to the ECJ. The commission itself can also take a member state to the ECJ if it receives a complaint that member state is not applying EU rules or regulations; but this happens rarely as most such complaints are resolved without going to court.

 

Except for matters relating to EU membership and treaties, laws made by a member state, including those relating to security and anti terrorism, have nothing to do with the EU.

 

Laws such as the UK Parliament's various anti terrorism Acts? All passed without any need to seek any sort of 'permission' from the EU!

 

In a reply to @Chomper Higgot you said

 

Freedom of movement plays no part at all in this. Since the principle of freedom of movement was first introduced in 1964 member states have had the right to limit it on the grounds of public policy, public security or public health (source).

 

When all the different directives on freedom of movement were combined into one in 2004, this was incorporated into that new directive (source).

 

 

Do you really believe this pony? Tell us; how many ex UK MPs have gone onto high paid, or any, EU jobs when they left Parliament. There's Kinnock and you could stretch it to include Ashdown in his role in Bosnia; who else?

 

If you want to present cogent arguments in order to reason with anyone, you should find out the facts first! 

 

Your posts I've quoted here contain none. As do many others of yours.

12 hours ago, 7by7 said:

This is not a valid point; the issue has nothing to do with the EU.

 

A member state's courts are, and always have been, independent of the EU. Except for matters relating to EU rules and regulations which individuals or member governments can, after the case has been heard in the member state's highest court, take to the ECJ. The commission itself can also take a member state to the ECJ if it receives a complaint that member state is not applying EU rules or regulations; but this happens rarely as most such complaints are resolved without going to court.

 

Except for matters relating to EU membership and treaties, laws made by a member state, including those relating to security and anti terrorism, have nothing to do with the EU.

 

Laws such as the UK Parliament's various anti terrorism Acts? All passed without any need to seek any sort of 'permission' from the EU!

 

In a reply to @Chomper Higgot you said

 

Freedom of movement plays no part at all in this. Since the principle of freedom of movement was first introduced in 1964 member states have had the right to limit it on the grounds of public policy, public security or public health (source).

 

When all the different directives on freedom of movement were combined into one in 2004, this was incorporated into that new directive (source).

 

 

Do you really believe this pony? Tell us; how many ex UK MPs have gone onto high paid, or any, EU jobs when they left Parliament. There's Kinnock and you could stretch it to include Ashdown in his role in Bosnia; who else?

 

If you want to present cogent arguments in order to reason with anyone, you should find out the facts first! 

 

Your posts I've quoted here contain none. As do many others of yours.

See my earlier post on not responding to you,if my posts upset you so much then put me on ignore .

2 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

Just like they had before, when they were a major contributor to the growth of our country. They will be very welcome to return again.

Glad to hear it,and lets hope they put on a few extra courses when they rebuild hadrians wall.

2 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

 

Joking apart people are really struggling. Zero hours contracts are a damned disgrace in my opinion. Also the trend to push people off the unemployment lists and into self employed status has been devastating for many. 

The UK is not in a good place given the pressures from corona and Brexit.

Agree on your first point ,on your second i beg to differ,the " self employed " status is a way to get round paying the minimum wage,however a recent court case involving uber who lost,has meant all its workers are in fact employees,this should have implications to any employee using such a practise

2 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

 

I 

1 minute ago, Rookiescot said:

 

Dunno if the eastern europeans will be able to undercut the cheap labour trying to get in from the Peoples Democratic Kingdom of Brexitland.

Oh i don,t know,with a little help from their friends i.e " self employed""emp!oyment contracts,zero hour contracts ( formerly made possible by freedom of movement,now made possible thanks to the unemployment created by the corona pandemic ) sure they,ll cope.

4 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

 

Did it?

Those "banana republics" now have far more international clout as part of the EU than the UK does out of it.

They,ll a!so have " freedom of movement " to settle in scotland,should they join the eu.

2 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

 

Did it?

Those "banana republics" now have far more international clout as part of the EU than the UK does out of it.

Some would argue that the UK is now a banana republic. Although given we we still have an unelected head of state I suppose the correct term would be banana kingdom.

 " unelected head of state "? What are you on about?

4 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

 

The EU would say yes just to annoy Brexiteers.

6 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

 

Like they did when they took on all the bankrupt banana republics,backfired on them though dudn,t it ?

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The UK has always been able to make its own laws regarding safety and security.

 

 

The UK’s membership and/or the UK leaving the EU has absolutely no bearing on this woman’s case.

 

Which has been explained to you a number of times.

On your first point how could the uk have made its own laws while we had freedom of movement in operation? The majority of the uks mps loved the eu as they could sit scratching theirselves,dreaming about their future in a well paid position in the eu,instead of actually doing the job they were paid to,this was proved by the antics following the peoples vote when the gravy train hit the buffers..i am obviously trying to flog a dead horse regarding trying to reason with you,so in future won,t bother.

9 hours ago, JonnyF said:

It's going to be amusing to see Sturgeon squirming as she gives evidence, but if nothing else she is a very accomplished liar so it wouldn't surprise me to see her continue to pull the wool over the eyes of the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish people.

 

Let's hope the truth comes out. The coverup has gone on long enough and is dragging the good name of UK politics through the mud. If this debacle is the result of devolution, maybe Boris was correct all along. It's become embarrassing at this point and the Scottish people deserve better than this from their leaders. Much better. 

In the extremely unlikely scenario of scotland voting for independence,can,t see this fiasco helping their chances of gaining membership to the eu..

11 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You back on your fixation again.

 

As has been explained, this woman’s case has absolutely nothing at all to do with the EU or the UK’s membership of/exit from the EU.

 

 

And as its been explained to you,she had no respect or loyalty to the laws of her country, ( past tense )shes s**t her bed,now she has to lie in it,the uk is now independent of the eu ( a fact it would appear some sections of society have difficulty accepting )also i am not " back on my fixtation" i initially asked a question on here regarding a hypothetical scenario,which was answered.consequently the uk can now make its own long overdue laws up regarding safety and security.

1 hour ago, polpott said:

No its facts, something you have a problem with as you only seem capable of spouting rhetoric.

Since when were ifs,buts and maybes facts?

4 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

So what has the EU got to do with this topic?

 

Why did you bring them into it?

Raising a valid point.

1 minute ago, 7by7 said:

 

What has the EU got to do with it? Unless you are saying that you think the EU forced this decision upon the Supreme Court!

 

If so, you are totally wrong. 

 

Although prior to Brexit decisions of the UK's Supreme Court (or Law Lords before that) could be appealed to the European Court of Justice, that was only if the case involved EU rules and regulations. Which this case obviously does not.

 

I don't know if Begum can appeal to the ECtHR; but that is not an EU organisation and never has been. It was established by the Council Of Europe of which the UK was a founder member in 1949.

 

Supposition.

On 2/15/2021 at 7:26 AM, Dagfinnur Traustason said:

These guys realized this already 1964. After that they made a song and informed the world. You should listen to it!

 

Sin sod is for silly sod,give,em nowt

Am i missing something here?so the vaccine won,t work without a letter of certification?

9 hours ago, NanLaew said:

 

Relevance?

Wondered if he,d personally witnessed the state of the country since independence,freedoms a wonderfull concept to an armchair revoulutionary sitting in his des-res,unfortunat!y you can,t eat it.a scholarship is the on!y way out of poverty to millions of people.

23 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

I wonder what their reaction will be when spectators are allowed back in and the monkey chants when a black player has the ball start again!

 

Yes, I know it's only a mindless minority who make these chants; but it still happens.

Theres laws in place to tackle this type of behaviour and is up to the po!ice to enforce them.

6 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Or diabetes, or kidney problems, or urinary retention, or gout  ........ there's a long list of stuff causing swollen feet/ankles.

With problems with the heart being the most common

9 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I suggest you take another look at the ‘Rhodes Scholarship’ its stated aims and the actual history of who receives and does not benefit from its largesse.

On your reply to my post who is questioning the rhodes scholarship? And perhaps you could elaborate on your post of 9 minutes ago,have you ever been to rhodesia,now zimbabwe?

21 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

What’s the problem with not wanting a statue of an imperialist and racist over a university college that welcomes students from all nations, all cultures and all races?

The rhodes scholarship

International hub for sports and fitness?with the air quality in pattaya at danger levels you,d probably be better off staying at home.

Had a resu!t in makros a few years ago,they were selling wilkinson disposable razors 10for £2.50 bloke in front of me had a pack of 10 ( 10 x10s, 100 in all) went through and got charged £2.50. Stocked up with a few packs and am still using them today.