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.

 

Quick question for UK members, Who will be the UK's Ron Paul ?

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:01 PM
link   
roger hayes of the BRITISH CONSTITUTION GROUP this movement will get big but like most things its about getting people to see the illusion for what it really is, check out there site also look at LAWFULL REBELLION because anything has got to be better than what we have got in government now




posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:04 PM
link   
One thing that annoys me is "popularist" politicans.

Especially the ones that want to leave the EU and the Racist parties like the BNP.

They add NOTHING of value to the country, all they do is stirr up and rise on popularity votes or protest votes.

That is no way to run a country.

They will be cutting off their nose despite their faces. So much non tangable things are gained from being in the EU, trade, ability to work and live in other countries easier and more, sure some are just bitter and angry for whatever their reasons, but there is many who enjoy that extra freedom of moving about and frankly increased protection via the EU directives and rights that the UK happily tramples on until challenged in the EU courts.

Another thing that should be gotten rid off is the house of commons and the house of lords, and the first past the post system and the dual party system and adopt the du hont system as they pushed in Northern ireland to give all parties a chance.

The entire concept of the Westminster way of rule is based on CLASS division, that has to go.


edit on 13-8-2011 by JennaDarling because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:05 PM
link   

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.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:08 PM
link   

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.


The same could be said of American's views of Europe by equating socialism to Communism, Nazism and worse.

That door swings both ways.

Yes generalisations is bad, but sometimes it is just put out there as a reminder of perceptions by the majority or sometimes tongue in cheek.

One thing I do see on ATS and american forums is over the top patriotism and not able to take a joke.

Europeans are humourous a lot of the time, Americans online do seem to take things too seriously.

We are more open and relaxed and don't go around wanting to shoot everybody all of the time.

PS: Academia does not equate to real life.


edit on 13-8-2011 by JennaDarling because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:11 PM
link   
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



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


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.

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.

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.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:13 PM
link   

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



You lost common law in the courts a long time ago.

How many cases of violations of privacy and rights have been upheld against the UK that your lovely UK deprived you off?

It has been all over the news many times and many cases of the UK depriving rights that they had and the European courts enforced them.




edit on 13-8-2011 by JennaDarling because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   
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.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   
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



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:18 PM
link   

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


next court case you are in, ask the judge if this is being tried under common law.

Do that ok?



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:19 PM
link   

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.


devolution is both a good thing and a bad thing. but that is a different topic lol

It wont matter anyway that is why they are pushing devolution as we are all member states of Europe anyway.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   
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)



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by JennaDarling
 
same as asking if there under oath, i know where your going with this but at the end of the day we have a constitution and the ptb are not sticking to it, instead screwing more and more with statute law and as far as im concerned our constitution still stands but the majority of the british public are so unware of whats being done to erode this from us one day it may be lost forever,imo time to fight back at the system and get it back to a fairer way



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:26 PM
link   

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)


No party system eh?

Why was there a hung paralement last election then?

There is usually 3 parties, Conservative, Labour and Liberal. That has been that way for all the time I have been alive, sure there is one or 2 back benchers fielding questions but it is the top 2 then that 3rd one that everybody see's.

the Du hont system was pushed in Northern Ireland, the majority system /first past the post/ in London was questioned and considered to being changed going forward.

So since they pushed the Du Hont system down Northern Irelands throat, why can Westminster not adopt that? I mean what is good for the geese is good for the gander no? Or is it hypocracy showing its ugly face again?



edit on 13-8-2011 by JennaDarling because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:33 PM
link   

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.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:37 PM
link   

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.


Indeed and I totally agree, problem is without reinforcing other area sof the economy, we have to put up with it for the short term.


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.


Nope and thankfully this is at least something the Government recognises, however they are still essentially held to ransom for the time being until we get our economy diversified.


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.
#

The EU seems to percieve the UK as a cash cow, to fund what is continental largesse. We're expect top contribute a huge sum and get chastised for wanting the rebate to stay, but France benefits to the tune of some £30 billion a year for paying their farmers to sit on their arses and sup wine. The system in Europe is far more corrupt and in need of reform than our own. Our problem with Europe stems from the fact that here in the UK, we like to obey rules. As such, we follow EU regulations to the letter, while the rest of Europe maintains state run industries for their "national interest".



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:41 PM
link   

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.


There has been entire threads based on methods of ruling, democracies, republics etc...

But the current system of the House of Lords basically enforces aristrocy.

The ultaimte aim of any politican is to get to the House of Lords , a peerage. Cash for peerages etc.

How many have been caught in corruption? How many have been caught paid to ask questions?

Where there is politics there is corruption, be it business or crime it is there. Everywhere.

Sure oversight as the Americans call it, should be there, alot of that oversight is ultimately the European Courts, and thats is a good thing beleive it or not, yes I know alot are bitter about Europe but that is another topic lol to many it is a good thing, myself included and I am not dillusional
Lol

we all now the current system of the House of Commons and Lords and the voting system of majority votes does not work, That was proven at the last election, and colations do not work well for the benefit of a country, that has been proven too, as it turns into a you scratch my back we scratch yours politics ( even though that is politics generally lol ).

I find it arrogant that a system of voting was imposed onto a region in the UK (Northern Ireland - Du hont system) and yet Westminster do not adopt it themsleves., THAT there is a bad example of do as we say but not as we do.

Sure the Duhont system gives power to smaller parties, that is both a GOOD thing and a BAD thing, usually smaller parties represent a disgruntled minority (paramilitaries and terrorist groups in Northern Ireland) and Racist groups in England (The BNP). but still, regardles they have a vote and need to be heard. Even though what they say we do not agree with nor like sure. But that is life.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:46 PM
link   
I dont agree with every thing George Galloway says, but hes an honest working class man. Of the people and for all the people. Hes my choice of a leader for this country, or whats left of it. After the gang of thieves who have been in control for decades. Who have ruined these green and pleasant lands.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by JennaDarling
 


The fact you have to ask shows you don't fully understand how Parliament is supposed to work.

MP's are freely able to cross the floor, as much as they like, without fear of being reprimanded. It is merely showing their support the Government.

However, if they did this while a member of a party, which is outside the Parliamentary system, they would have the whip removed and the support of the party would be lost, compromising their selection at the next election. Add that to the fact that if they then stood at the next election as an independant, even if they were the best MP that area had ever, people would then vote in their parties new candidate because people vote along party lines, contrary to how it supposed to be!

The party system is wholly seperate from parliament. Consider it like a parasite that has take over the host.
As for the system in NI, that was put in place because if they didn't then the Unionists would run the show, like they did before in the last home rule scenario and the Republicans would get pissy about when they realise they don't have as much support, leading to a collapse of the pease process. That is why they are all made to work together and share power as it is the only way to keep the Republican minority from throwing a fit and killing people.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 05:47 PM
link   
Reply to post by Cosmic4life
 


I'd rather not have a UK equivalent of Ron Paul.

He talks the good talk on occasion but I cannot tolerate his racism and occasionally ludicrous proposals that can never work in the real world.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join