Elerond
-
Posts
2620 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Elerond
-
-
Who you think is best to lead UK out from EU
May - We will sent notice to leave as early as next year maybe, ask me again in
December 2077after I have secured my position as PM.Gove - I am not sure what to do, but I love my country I even had to
backstabput friendship aside to become Conservative leader and then new PMLeadsom - I will make sure that UK is out from EU next year and she will make Britain "the greatest country on earth" with her. I am
TrumpThatcher lite.I purposefully for sake of bad humor overemphasized their statements for press.
-
Congratulations Britain..
Standing up to unelected bureaucrats and megalomaniacs is always the right thing to do.
J.
I have also always find it is excellent way to stand up against unelected bureaucrats and megalomaniacs, by changing them to another group of unelected bureaucrats and megalomaniacs
PS. I always wonder why people bother to put unelected before bureaucrats, as bureaucrats by their nature are unelected
-
-
You know guys that all countries in Europe, except Belarus have signed same rights for humans (european convention on human rights) and abide by rulings of same human rights court (european court of human rights)? This includes all EU member states, Russia and Turkey. Which of course don't mean that all people in those countries care about human rights or aren't willing to take them away from other people, but at least still they can't do so freely and without opposition.
-
Polls show that even though overwhelming majority of non-white people vote for remain they were only able to influence final result 1% towards remain from 53% (percentage of white voters that supported leave) to 52% leave.
Non-Christian identified voters were able to move result 6% from 58% to 52%
Under 65 years olds were able to move result 8% towards remain. People younger than 35 and people over 45 negated each others votes. If half of those under 35 that didn't vote had voted with similar split as those of them that vote then remain would had won.
And then small lightening in form of somebody analyzing current situation in political leadership fight
So, let me get this straight… the leader of the opposition campaigned to stay but secretly wanted to leave, so his party held a non-binding vote to shame him into resigning so someone else could lead the campaign to ignore the result of the non-binding referendum which many people now think was just angry people trying to shame politicians into seeing they’d all done nothing to help them.
Meanwhile, the man who campaigned to leave because he hoped losing would help him win the leadership of his party, accidentally won and ruined any chance of leading because the man who thought he couldn’t lose, did – but resigned before actually doing the thing the vote had been about. The man who’d always thought he’d lead next, campaigned so badly that everyone thought he was lying when he said the economy would crash – and he was, but it did, but he’s not resigned, but, like the man who lost and the man who won, also now can’t become leader. Which means the woman who quietly campaigned to stay but always said she wanted to leave is likely to become leader instead.
Which means she holds the same view as the leader of the opposition but for opposite reasons, but her party’s view of this view is the opposite of the opposition’s. And the opposition aren’t yet opposing anything because the leader isn’t listening to his party, who aren’t listening to the country, who aren’t listening to experts or possibly paying that much attention at all. However, none of their opponents actually want to be the one to do the thing that the vote was about, so there’s not yet anything actually on the table to oppose anyway. And if no one ever does do the thing that most people asked them to do, it will be undemocratic and if any one ever does do it, it will be awful.
Clear?
-
2
-
-
I'm not absolving them of their own stupidity, but for quite a while they haven't been calling the shots in anything of relevance.
Extreme nationalism is in rise and in past it has had habit to create conflicts between nations.
-
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/684549/EU-cannot-rely-NATO-needs-new-defence-policy-chief
Interesting development. An EU military under the command of a EU government. Amazing, the dream of William Penn, Charles de St-Pierre, Napoleon, & Hitler coming true with hardly a shot fired. This would make me feel better about a "leave" vote if I were British.
That article is like at least 17 years late. And as fun fact it was Tony Blair (former prime minister of UK) that drive through realization of EU military forces (Common Security and Defence Policy) to ensure defense of UK.
Here nice picture of European defense organisations.
The European Air Transport Command (EATC) is the command centre that exercises the operational control of the majority of the aerial refueling capabilities and military transport fleets of a consortium of seven Western European countries.
European Air Group (EAG) is an association of the air forces of 7 member nations (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain and United Kingdom) working together to stimulate change and collectively to enhance the tactical capabilities of the Group’s air forces through better cooperation.
The Movement Coordination Centre Europe (MCCE) is an international military movements control centre at Eindhoven Airport in the Netherlands whose members are predominantly drawn from NATO and the EU.
The Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP), formerly known as the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP), is a major element of the Common Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union (EU) and is the domain of EU policy covering defence and military aspects, as well as civilian crisis management.
The European Gendarmerie Force (EUROGENDFOR or EGF) was launched by an agreement in 2006 between five member states of the European Union (EU): France, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain. Romania joined in 2009; Poland in 2011.
The Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation (French: Organisation conjointe de coopération en matière d'armement;OCCAR) is a European intergovernmental organisation which facilitates and manages collaborative armament programmes through their lifecycle between the nations of Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom.
Finabel is an organisation promoting cooperation and interoperability between the national armies of the member states of the European Union (EU).
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is an intergovernmental military alliance based on the North Atlantic Treaty which was signed on 4 April 1949.
Article is about seems to speak about increasing capacities and responsibilities of EU Battlegroups (EU BG) which are military units adhering to the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) of the European Union (EU). Often based on contributions from a coalition of member states, each of the eighteen Battlegroups consists of a battalion-sized force (1,500 troops) reinforced with combat support elements. Battlegroups have been fully operational from 2007.
-
2
-
-
It seem that all the nationalist parties are more than willing to take this opportunity offer their visions of UK's future to drive in their own agenda.
Weren't nationalist racist old people the "cause" of this most horrid Brexit? But I guess such reasonings are only valid when it actually furthers some agenda, and when not are discarded once more. That integrity.
It was nationalists (and political opportunists) in England that were major driving force behind Brexit, nationalist parties in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland seem to be mostly EU positive (which is most likely helped by fact that lots of English nationalists don't like EU).
-
How intolerant of the EU parliament to not accept different debate cultures, such as the british. That was so much tamer compared to day-to-day debates at Westminster, and most certainly compared to Thatcher vs. the opposition in the 80's. I am disappointed
Farage has been in EU parliament past 17 years, that is how things go there always. He insults people and then they insult him back (sometimes other way around). It has been very constructive.
-
1
-
-
It's time to put Welsh independence on agenda – Leanne Wood
Leanne Wood said Brexit was an opportunity to break free from the UK – and though Wales voted overwhelmingly to leave the EU she argued that its citizens would think again if the country became independent.
Plaid has long advocated independence for Wales but seen it as a long-term aspiration rather than a short-term goal. Brexit has altered that.
Wood said: “Last Thursday’s vote has changed everything. In all likelihood, with Scotland voting to remain, the UK will cease to exist in the near future. Northern Ireland will be considering its future too.
“Even though this situation was not of our making, Plaid Cymru believes that redesigning the current UK is the only option. A new union of independent nations working together for the common good.
“It is my belief that this independent Wales in a completely different context to last week’s referendum would want to be a part of the European Union.
“This is a huge challenge that we face. All of us, whether we voted in or out should be prepared to be bold and confident in being able to forge a new, strong, inclusive, outward-looking future for our nation.”
It seem that all the nationalist parties are more than willing to take this opportunity offer their visions of UK's future to drive in their own agenda.
-
Brexit: Gibraltar in talks with Scotland to stay in EU
We will leave EU, but on hindsight how about only half us leave and half will stay.
But it sounds interesting arrangement, where country's central government is out of EU but its semi autonomic regions will stay in. Arrangements that are other way, aren't that uncommon in EU, but this kind arrangement would be quite interesting to see if it could work.
-
Speaking about those legal loopholes
-
https://ricochet.com/the-new-rules-of-democracy-there-are-no-rules-just-give-me-what-i-want/
Too bad British progs can't do what American progs always do, just go to court and have any popular vote they don't like nullified.
Big part of western democracies is the laws that prevent majority taking rights from minorities. Things like constitutional rights depend heavily on such systems. And democracy is constantly living thing that don't stop in singular vote but continuously evolve through series of votes and even if you lose one vote you continue to argue for values/things/laws that you think are best for society so that society can reflect them again in next vote and so on until end of time. Meaning that there isn't anything that is set in stone in democratic society but only things that society at any given point of time thinks are rules they as collectively accept to abide by.
-
Although funny enough, the First Minister of Scotland Nicola Sturgeon has been very active over the weekend, exploring options to keep Scotland in EU with or without England
Yes this is true, for some reason Scotland has always been very ungrateful IMO to what England has done for them
To be part of the UK should be celebrated yet many Scottish people resent the UK, you almost want to tell Scotland " fine leave the UK " but Scotland is very relevant and important contributor towards the UK so we want them to stay
Don't you live in country that fought their way out from British(English) rule?
-
1
-
-
Maybe the idea of UK MPs trying to do work, scares him? Though they can't be THAT bad.
I can understand skepticism towards them. As it seems that nobody has plan what to do now, not even people organized referendum in first place or people that campaigned for this result.
-
John Oliver is not happy either:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEALC1z3QG8
For shame, he can be funny and have insight on matters, but this time it came off as impotent rage.
I enjoyed the section where he lists all the things the UK will have to do to leave the EU. He basically said "Now they have to work to do x, y and z." Usually when you set a goal you have to work to attain it, John.
"We want to leave the EU."
"But now you have to implement things that the EU has been dictating for you."
"Yeah, that's the point."
Although his point seemed to be more about reality to that UK has only up to 2 years to remake agreements that it has made in past 43 years.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDdLxTXBaAY
Probably best reason to leave EU that I have heard.
Don't know if video is real or fake, but at least it is bit funny
Its not like you to post these types of video because this is just a cruel generalization, that women comes as incredibly stupid ....seriously I feel embarrassed for her
She is the worst type of person to somehow represent the intellectual reasoning for BREXIT
So again this type of video will be used by people to say things like " ha ha...look how stupid people in the UK are "
Do you think its fair ....yes she is hot but this is not about her looks
But she did it for chickens and eggs, and she even accounted in bad things like not being able to go in Disneyland in Paris, because borders will be closed.
So I think that video is most likely just someone making fun about leave voters, but the scary thing is that people seem to accept it as truth, which is something that isn't that great for democracy.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDdLxTXBaAY
Probably best reason to leave EU that I have heard.
Don't know if video is real or fake, but at least it is bit funny
-
1
-
-
-
Well, we will see what the EU leaders think about the future, once the process of Brexit will start and they will need to redo the budget for the next years.
Article 50
1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.
2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.
3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.
4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.
A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.
As UK may not give their notification until October and withdrawal agreement negotiations may take years, which means that it is quite possible that we have new European parliament before UK's agreements with EU end and they actually leave the union. But at least we should have couple fun years ahead of us.
Hi Elerond
How you feeling about Brexit....are you negative....unsure ?
Your view on this matter is important to me because of all the interesting posts you make and effort you put in to your comments
It is what it is. People of UK wanted to leave union and it was their right to do so.
It will most likely negate all economic gains that Finland has succeed to do in past year and sent us back to regression, because of uncertainty in economic markets, which will most likely continue for some time even after when UK actually leaves EU.
If we look positive sides of things, this most likely means that some of those UK data centers need to leave from UK and move to countries that are still EU thanks to EU's data protection laws. And Finland is in pretty good position to offer them new home. And in theory our universities will get tens of millions euros in tuition fees from UK students, but I am pretty sure that their number will dramatically drop when their tuition rise from 0€ to somewhere near 18000€ per year.
UK's exit has change to make EU politics easier as they were big country with lots of special rights in union and now that they leave it will make union more equal.
On negative sides of things, this will make European nationalism stronger, far right parties will get influx on their popularity and we will continue to debate more about topics that actually only have marginal effect on things and much bigger issues get to be decide without public taking notice.
But as I said it is what it is. It will not end the world, but it will make use take look on how things are going especially our unified Europe project.
-
Well, we will see what the EU leaders think about the future, once the process of Brexit will start and they will need to redo the budget for the next years.
Article 50
1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.
2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.
3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.
4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.
A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.
As UK may not give their notification until October and withdrawal agreement negotiations may take years, which means that it is quite possible that we have new European parliament before UK's agreements with EU end and they actually leave the union. But at least we should have couple fun years ahead of us.
-
Haha, oh wow. They actually did it! How wouldn't i want to be a fly in the wall in Juncker's room now.
I would say that Cameron's room is most likely much more interesting. Juncker probably don't even have plans to continue his political career after his tenure in Commission is over, which is probably before actual brexit happens.
EDIT: It seems that Cameron's room has become much less interesting
David Cameron resigns after UK votes to leave European Union
-
Doesn't it mean a reduced VAT take now though? Obviously they've never charged me VAT, but now they won't get any cut from sales to EU countries?
We see how it goes in two years (or longer if UK and EU so decide) after they officially declare that they will leave EU, until that current agreements are in force.
-
UK Sales are up. Overseas consumers flock to uk sites (amazon uk, ebay uk) as pound drops.
Nice to see they are getting a boost to their economy over this.
It isn't necessary that good boost, because if people buy imported stuff then they actually may suffer even some lose. If they sell stuff that is produced in UK then they may get some boost.
US Election 2016, part II
in Way Off-Topic
Posted
Here is two laws that I have seen mentioned in media about Clinton's email server
18 U.S. Code § 798 - Disclosure of classified information
(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—
(1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or
(2) concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or
(3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or
(4) obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
(b) As used in subsection (a) of this section—
The term “classified information” means information which, at the time of a violation of this section, is, for reasons of national security, specifically designated by a United States Government Agency for limited or restricted dissemination or distribution;
The terms “code,” “cipher,” and “cryptographic system” include in their meanings, in addition to their usual meanings, any method of secret writing and any mechanical or electrical device or method used for the purpose of disguising or concealing the contents, significance, or meanings of communications;
The term “foreign government” includes in its meaning any person or persons acting or purporting to act for or on behalf of any faction, party, department, agency, bureau, or military force of or within a foreign country, or for or on behalf of any government or any person or persons purporting to act as a government within a foreign country, whether or not such government is recognized by the United States;
The term “communication intelligence” means all procedures and methods used in the interception of communications and the obtaining of information from such communications by other than the intended recipients;
The term “unauthorized person” means any person who, or agency which, is not authorized to receive information of the categories set forth in subsection (a) of this section, by the President, or by the head of a department or agency of the United States Government which is expressly designated by the President to engage in communication intelligence activities for the United States.
© Nothing in this section shall prohibit the furnishing, upon lawful demand, of information to any regularly constituted committee of the Senate or House of Representatives of the United States of America, or joint committee thereof.
(d)
(1) Any person convicted of a violation of this section shall forfeit to the United States irrespective of any provision of State law—
(A) any property constituting, or derived from, any proceeds the person obtained, directly or indirectly, as the result of such violation; and
(B) any of the person’s property used, or intended to be used, in any manner or part, to commit, or to facilitate the commission of, such violation.
(2) The court, in imposing sentence on a defendant for a conviction of a violation of this section, shall order that the defendant forfeit to the United States all property described in paragraph (1).
(3) Except as provided in paragraph (4), the provisions of subsections (b), ©, and (e) through (p) of section 413 of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 (21 U.S.C. 853(b), ©, and (e)–(p)), shall apply to—
(A) property subject to forfeiture under this subsection;
(B) any seizure or disposition of such property; and
© any administrative or judicial proceeding in relation to such property,
if not inconsistent with this subsection.
(4) Notwithstanding section 524© of title 28, there shall be deposited in the Crime Victims Fund established under section 1402 of the Victims of Crime Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10601) all amounts from the forfeiture of property under this subsection remaining after the payment of expenses for forfeiture and sale authorized by law.
(5) As used in this subsection, the term “State” means any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any territory or possession of the United States.
18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information
(a) Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, goes upon, enters, flies over, or otherwise obtains information concerning any vessel, aircraft, work of defense, navy yard, naval station, submarine base, fueling station, fort, battery, torpedo station, dockyard, canal, railroad, arsenal, camp, factory, mine, telegraph, telephone, wireless, or signal station, building, office, research laboratory or station or other place connected with the national defense owned or constructed, or in progress of construction by the United States or under the control of the United States, or of any of its officers, departments, or agencies, or within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States, or any place in which any vessel, aircraft, arms, munitions, or other materials or instruments for use in time of war are being made, prepared, repaired, stored, or are the subject of research or development, under any contract or agreement with the United States, or any department or agency thereof, or with any person on behalf of the United States, or otherwise on behalf of the United States, or any prohibited place so designated by the President by proclamation in time of war or in case of national emergency in which anything for the use of the Army, Navy, or Air Force is being prepared or constructed or stored, information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or
(b) Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, and with like intent or reason to believe, copies, takes, makes, or obtains, or attempts to copy, take, make, or obtain, any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, document, writing, or note of anything connected with the national defense; or
© Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, receives or obtains or agrees or attempts to receive or obtain from any person, or from any source whatever, any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note, of anything connected with the national defense, knowing or having reason to believe, at the time he receives or obtains, or agrees or attempts to receive or obtain it, that it has been or will be obtained, taken, made, or disposed of by any person contrary to the provisions of this chapter; or
(d) Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or
(e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or
(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
(g) If two or more persons conspire to violate any of the foregoing provisions of this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be subject to the punishment provided for the offense which is the object of such conspiracy.
(h)
(1) Any person convicted of a violation of this section shall forfeit to the United States, irrespective of any provision of State law, any property constituting, or derived from, any proceeds the person obtained, directly or indirectly, from any foreign government, or any faction or party or military or naval force within a foreign country, whether recognized or unrecognized by the United States, as the result of such violation. For the purposes of this subsection, the term “State” includes a State of the United States, the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States.
(2) The court, in imposing sentence on a defendant for a conviction of a violation of this section, shall order that the defendant forfeit to the United States all property described in paragraph (1) of this subsection.
(3) The provisions of subsections (b), ©, and (e) through (p) of section 413 of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 (21 U.S.C. 853(b), ©, and (e)–(p)) shall apply to—
(A) property subject to forfeiture under this subsection;
(B) any seizure or disposition of such property; and
© any administrative or judicial proceeding in relation to such property,
if not inconsistent with this subsection.
(4) Notwithstanding section 524© of title 28, there shall be deposited in the Crime Victims Fund in the Treasury all amounts from the forfeiture of property under this subsection remaining after the payment of expenses for forfeiture and sale authorized by law.
Gross Negligence
A lack of care that demonstrates reckless disregard for the safety or lives of others, which is so great it appears to be a conscious violation of other people's rights to safety. It is more than simple inadvertence, and can affect the amount of damages.
Bolded part is the section that I have seen different media outlets to cite as most likely subsection that Clinton would have broken.