General Election

[andsome]

  :D

GOOD ONE and oh so true.

[Sir T Fireball]

Labour -36

Conservative 23

Liberal Democrat 3

UK Independence Party 15

Green 14

CONSERVATIVE

B)

You know it makes sense :P

[Rebel=UK=]

Well i think labour has had its chance...and failed in many respects. Mostly "asylum" we have no Asylum Seekes in the country just freeloaders. Almost Everyday i see new so called Asylum seekers moving in around me, i am becoming the minority around here in my own country. It make my blood boil it really does.

[Gandalph]

Well i think labour has had its chance...and failed in many respects. Mostly "asylum" we have no Asylum Seekes in the country just freeloaders. Almost Everyday i see new so called Asylum seekers moving in around me, i am becoming the minority around here in my own country. It make my blood boil it really does.

We have had the same sort of thing happening up here in the Scottish Borders as well Rebel. The local seasonal jobs over the Winter period have been taken up by them and the local people who have gone to work at these places year after year have not been able to get any work. It was revealed about eight weeks ago that the asylum seekers had been working for £1.10 pence per hour less than what the Company would have had to pay the locals for doing the same job. Needless to say there was nearly a lynching outside of the factory when this information was revealed.

[Robbers Dog]

we have no Asylum Seekes in the country just freeloaders.

Puerile waffle.

[Gandalph]

Also meant to add to the above that here in the Berwickshire side of the Borders Region it has always been a Liberal Democrat stronghold. They were the ones that discovered what was going on.

[Rebel=UK=]

we have no Asylum Seekes in the country just freeloaders.

Puerile waffle.

Yeah well we live in an area surrounded by rich stable countries...if these asylum seeker were running from death any1 of the countries they go through to get here would take them, and they would be greatful, but no . If it wasnt for the UK's easy benefit system, do you really think these people would seek refuge in the UK.......You can work it out im sure.

Another Thing that gets to me is that all of the Asylum seekers around here seems to always have the new latest gear, mobile phones (all of the 20+ kids aswell) and even cars with no tax etc. I know its all funded by crime as ive seen the police raids.

[andsome]

Also meant to add to the above that here in the Berwickshire side of the Borders Region it has always been a Liberal Democrat stronghold. They were the ones that discovered what was going on.

The Lib Dem's would hand total control of everything to Brussels, and the UK government would be like a local council. Then with our benefit system, the whole damned lot would end up here, and we would have no say in the matter at all.

[Gandalph]

Your probably right there andsome. I'm all for Human Rights, provided the immigrants don't come here to take the H2O which a lot of them around here have done.

In this week's local rag one of the Immigrants was taken to the local Sheriff Court and he had to have an interpreter (also acting as his Lawyer) as he could not speak English. He was charged with Driving a Vehicle with no Excise Duty or Insurance and no M.o.T, when asked how he pleaded his interpreter said 'Not Guilty, my client was not aware of the Laws of the United Kingdom and did not realise that the vehicle which he had just bought required any of the things as laid out in the charges against him'. After careful consideration the Sheriff fine the defendant Twenty Pounds and Three Penalty Points. The Sheriff then told the Interpreter to make sure the Defendant was informed and made to understand the legal requirements of owning a motor vehicle in Great Britain.

The same night at the bar of an Hotel where the Immigrant was staying in Bed and Breakfast, he was overheard by a local policeman (off duty) laughing and joking about the Court proceedings and the fine he had been given that afternoon, IN ENGLISH!. :angry:

[Rebel=UK=]

local Sheriff Court

Sheriff :unsure: anyhow thats gets me even more annyoed , cos that woulkd have cost loads more

[Gandalph]

local Sheriff Court

Sheriff :unsure: anyhow that's gets me even more annoyed , cos that woulkd have cost loads more

Sheriff is the Scots equivalent to a Magistrate in England. We have Sheriff Court's where in England they have Magistrates Courts. Same thing except the Laws of Scotland in some cases are different to those on the English side of the Border.

I know what you mean about the fine. If that had been me or you we would have probably been fine in the region of about £300.00 with ten penalty points, or, banned from driving for three or even six-months. As I said in my post, some of them are just taking the water.

[Lionheart]

-pops-

"Nobody in modern politics gives a fig for anyone except themselves".

Never a truer word spoken.

[andsome]

-pops-

"Nobody in modern politics gives a fig for anyone except themselves".

Never a truer word spoken.

Agreed

[Tankus]

The Indepedent

The UN - not Mr Blair - had the power to rule that Iraq was not complying with its resolutions

UN Security Council resolution 1441 might not be sufficient legal basis for war

Lord Goldsmith expressed caution about going to war without a second United Nations resolution.

Lord Goldsmith said that American statements on the legality of war were not applicable in Britain.

hmm ......didnt our military require a cast iron statment from our solicitors general , confirming the legal justification of our "invasion" of Iraq ,before any action , so that our troops would be protected from human right legal claims via the treaty that Blair signed us up for ...(the US are exempt as Bush refused to ratify it )

Now what ...open door .?...legal butfest ........?

Iraqi's over here , going through our courts , paid for by tax funded legal relief , looking for payment from our government for damages ...........

I think I read somewhere that the US were giving a flat rate of $250 to relative's

of collaterally killed Iraqi's ..... ( could be wrong there though)

Probably wont mean much to the election result due to Iraqi fatigue setting in .... Teflon Tony strikes again ......

Be a lot of legal action after though ...methinks

[Tankus]

[andsome]

BRILLIANT

[Gandalph]

The Forum Poll still has Labour ahead of the Conservatives and by all accounts so do the polls that are being shown on the television. The local opinion up here in the Borders is that people don't like the look of Howard and had they not been Lib Dem voters would not have voted for him anyway. I have also heard a Conservative voter (a neighbour) saying they are changing their vote this year to Labour or Liberal Democrat because they think Howard is an expressionless liar and he would say anything to get himself into office and he was on the wrong subject of attacking Blair over the Iraq War. They want to know what the Conservatives are going to do for Britain and he is not getting the message of that over to them. There is in fact a large majority of people here that think Labour will be re-elected because of Howard. They have said "He is the wrong man to lead the party and if he is the best the Conservatives can offer then they deserve to lose".

[rong]

Well I will not spoil my ballot paper as I expected to, I shall vote for these www.englishdemocrats.org.uk

[andsome]

Regarding the Lib Dems, it all boils down as to whether you really want every other country in Europe ruling us, with our government, whether you like them or not, being little better than a local council.

[Tankus]

Channel 4 news have a leaked copy of Goldsmiths advice on the legality of war ...they have not informed the government before going on air

It bears no relation to the summary supplied to the cabinet , and parliment .... or does it .....?

extracts here untill the site gets pulled by the government

EXTRACT FROM MINUTE OF THE ATTORNEY

GENERAL TO THE BRITISH PRIME MINISTER, 7 MARCH

2003

"Summary

26. To sum up, the language of resolution 1441 leaves the position unclear and the statements made on adoption of the resolution suggest that there were differences of view within the Council as to the legal effect of the resolution. Arguments can be made on both sides. A key question is whether there is in truth a need for an assessment of whether Iraq's conduct constitutes a failure to take the final opportunity or has constituted a failure fully to cooperate within the meaning of OP4 such that the basis of the cease-fire is destroyed. If an assessment is needed of that situation, it would be for the Council to make it. A narrow textual reading of the resolution suggests that sort of assessment is not needed, because the Council has predetermined the issue. Public statements, on the other hand, say otherwise.

27. In these circumstances, I remain of the opinion that the safest legal course would be to secure the adoption of a further resolution to authorise the use of force. [...] The key point is that it should establish that the Council has concluded that Iraq has failed to take the final opportunity offered by resolution 1441, as in the draft which has already been tabled.

28. Nevertheless, having regard to the information on the negotiating history which I have been given and to the arguments of the US Administration which I heard in Washington, I accept that a reasonable case can be made that resolution 1441 is capable in principle of reviving the authorisation in 678 without a further resolution.

29. However, the argument that resolution 1441 alone has revived the authorisation to use force in resolution 678 will only be sustainable if there are strong factual grounds for concluding that Iraq has failed to take the final opportunity. In other words, we would need to be able to demonstrate hard evidence of non-compliance and non-cooperation. Given the structure of the resolution as a whole, the views of UNMOVIC and the IAEA will be highly significant in this respect. In the light of the latest reporting by UNMOVIC, you will need to consider very carefully whether the evidence of non-cooperation and non- compliance by Iraq is sufficiently compelling to justify the conclusion that Iraq has failed to take its final opportunity.

30. In reaching my conclusion, I have taken account of the fact that on a number of previous occasions, including in relation to Operation Desert Fox in December 1998 and Kosovo in 1999, UK forces have participated in military action on the basis of advice from my predecessors that the legality of the action under international law was no more than reasonably arguable. But a "reasonable case" does not mean that if the matter ever came before a court I would be confident that the court would agree with the view. I judge that, having regard to the arguments on both sides, and considering the resolution as a whole in the light of the statements made on adoption and subsequently, a court might well conclude that OPs 4 and 12 do requ1re a further Council decision in order to revive the authorisation in resolution 678. But equally I consider that the counter view can be reasonably maintained. However, it must be recognised that on previous occasions when military action was taken on the basis of a reasonably arguable case, the degree of public and Parliamentary scrutiny of the legal issue was nothing as great as it is today.

31. The analysis set out above applies whether a second resolution fails to be adopted because of a lack of votes or because it is vetoed. As I have said before, I do not believe that there is any basis in law for arguing that there is an implied condition of reasonableness which can be read into the power of veto conferred on the permanent members of the Security Council by the UN Charter. So there are no grounds for arguing that an "unreasonable veto" would entitle us to proceed on the basis of a presumed Security Council authorisation. In any event, if the majority of world opinion remains opposed to military action, it is likely to be difficult on the facts to categorise a French veto as "unreasonable". The legal analysis may, however, be affected by the course of events over the next week or so, eg the discussions on the draft second resolution. If we fail to achieve the adoption of a second resolution we would need to consider urgently at that stage the strength of our legal case in the light of circumstances at the time.

Possible consequences of acting without a second resolution

[...]"

[djohn]

Just to throw a light hearted oppinion on the election, I was checking the results for the lat election in Norwich [2001] and found an interesting bit of information.

I live in Norwich south with Charles Clarke as our current MP, we have a constitunancy in the north of Norwich as well and this is also Labour, on checking the results it also came up with this interesting side issue.

Norwich has recently become famous for its citizens’ demand for Viagra - more of the anti-impotence drug is bought here than anywhere else in the country. :wacko:

Taken from here. Stiff upper lip? :lol:

[Tankus]

Tony on Dimbley tonight .....shame ....but what does it matter .!..everyone say Baaaaaaa ....and vote

[andsome]

Just to throw a light hearted oppinion on the election, I was checking the results for the lat election in Norwich [2001] and found an interesting bit of information.

I live in Norwich south with Charles Clarke as our current MP, we have a constitunancy in the north of Norwich as well and this is also Labour, on checking the results it also came up with this interesting side issue.

Norwich has recently become famous for its citizens’ demand for Viagra - more of the anti-impotence drug is bought here than anywhere else in the country.  :wacko:

Taken from here. Stiff upper lip?  :lol:

I thought Viagra was supposed to give you more than a stiff upper lip.

[andsome]

Tony on Dimbley tonight  .....shame ....but what does it matter .!..everyone say Baaaaaaa ....and vote

He squirmed like an eel, it was good to watch.

[Hurdy]

The Usual Suspects.