It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Cobaltic1978
reply to post by JennaDarling
Yes, but let's not be too harsh on them. It's what they are taught in school. Anything outside of the U.S is insignificant.
Originally posted by Misoir
Originally posted by Cobaltic1978
reply to post by JennaDarling
Yes, but let's not be too harsh on them. It's what they are taught in school. Anything outside of the U.S is insignificant.
Wait, what? I resent that statement. Being from the United States does not necessarily mean that one lacks the proper knowledge in international politics and political geography. Yes, an overwhelming number of Americans unfortunately do but the way you presented your statement was to label all Americans as lacking in knowledge of anything which does not directly involve the US.
I in fact have deep respect for some of your statesmen of past. Edmund Burke and his fundamental belief in traditionalism often held as the founder of modern day conservative philosophy. Benjamin Disraeli and his approach to society of the rich being responsible for helping the poor so as to bring together intercourse of the classes, i.e. ‘One Nation Conservatism’. Winston Churchill is also an amazing statesman for his courage to stand up against the entire Nazi regime when it was on the march, threatening to invade Great Britain.
Obviously we will never know your country like you do but many of us have studied it within the realm of academia.
Originally posted by sensairich
reply to post by JennaDarling
protection by the eu have you lost your marbles, the eu is guilty of trying to remove common law from us the british people, and installing ever more rules/regulations to trample all over us.
we have our own constitution in this country if only the governments would adhere to it then we would be all better off, and lets not forget we shouldnt even be in the eu this was an act of treason on a massive scale which is still affecting us now all thanks to ted heath
Originally posted by sensairich
are you an expert on the court system then, as im aware all courts are still common law and are still the peoples courts however the ptb are trying to dictate to us that these courts are now statute law courts, i guess it depends on what you know and how to deal with the judge/magistrate but at the end of the day i do not consent to statute law courts
Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by JennaDarling
England is a bloody country! As much a country as Scotland and Wales. Try telling them they aren't! The only problem is England is the only country in the Union not to have it's own parliament. Westmisnter was the English parliament, but after Union it became the UK parliament, but then with devolution, this inbalance was never adressed.
Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by JennaDarling
And here you show a lack of knowledge to how Parliament should work. There is no "party system", it's just that because people vote along party lines that we have one. If people didn't vote for the party and instead voted for the candidate they believed would best represent their constituency, like they should, then we would have local people representing local people. As it stands now, party's can drop in their favoured people into an area, even if they have never lived there and know people will vote for them anyway because they are blue/red/yellow/green.
In place of the Commons and Lords, what would you have? A congress and senate? Same thing, different name. There has to a lower and upper house, unless you wnat to come up with a totally new system, which has eluded the brightest political minds since time began. The only issue I can see with the current set up is the non-elected nature of the Lords, but this is actually going to be changed with forthcoming legislation. Soon we will elect people into the Lords.edit on 13/8/11 by stumason because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by JennaDarling
And here you show a lack of knowledge to how Parliament should work. There is no "party system", it's just that because people vote along party lines that we have one. If people didn't vote for the party and instead voted for the candidate they believed would best represent their constituency, like they should, then we would have local people representing local people. As it stands now, party's can drop in their favoured people into an area, even if they have never lived there and know people will vote for them anyway because they are blue/red/yellow/green.
In place of the Commons and Lords, what would you have? A congress and senate? Same thing, different name. There has to a lower and upper house, unless you wnat to come up with a totally new system, which has eluded the brightest political minds since time began. The only issue I can see with the current set up is the non-elected nature of the Lords, but this is actually going to be changed with forthcoming legislation. Soon we will elect people into the Lords.edit on 13/8/11 by stumason because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Cobaltic1978
I understand where we are and the reasons for it, but being loyal to these instituitions have led us to this current situation. We cannot afford to continue to be held to ransom.
The country has had enough of their leeching, they have sucked us dry.
Originally posted by Cobaltic1978
The country is bankrupt as it is, yet we will soon be bailing out the majority of these great companies for a third/fourth time. Reliance on one sector doesn't work.
#
Originally posted by Cobaltic1978
As far as Europe is concerned, they look at us as a tourist destination, nothing more than that. Even the great and Holy Banking Sector is ignored when it comes to how we are perceived within Europe. So I say F**K em we are going to the wall anyway, time to let it happen and rebuild.
Originally posted by Cobaltic1978
Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by JennaDarling
And here you show a lack of knowledge to how Parliament should work. There is no "party system", it's just that because people vote along party lines that we have one. If people didn't vote for the party and instead voted for the candidate they believed would best represent their constituency, like they should, then we would have local people representing local people. As it stands now, party's can drop in their favoured people into an area, even if they have never lived there and know people will vote for them anyway because they are blue/red/yellow/green.
In place of the Commons and Lords, what would you have? A congress and senate? Same thing, different name. There has to a lower and upper house, unless you wnat to come up with a totally new system, which has eluded the brightest political minds since time began. The only issue I can see with the current set up is the non-elected nature of the Lords, but this is actually going to be changed with forthcoming legislation. Soon we will elect people into the Lords.edit on 13/8/11 by stumason because: (no reason given)
I agree there should be a lower and upper house, but both should be elected. We need wise and experinced heads at the top, but to have an unelected body deciding the laws is a pre-historic concept.
We are supposed to live in a democracy, however our current system (House of Lords) is anything but.