On Nov 3, 6:30 pm, "Dr. Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF" <""noujwas
\"@yahoo.com                                                               wrote:
> cornholio wrote:
> > On Nov 3, 1:29 am, Doug Jewell  wrote:
> >> Dr. Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF > wrote:> Stepmother to die for child murder
>
> >>>http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1§ion=0&article=127842&d=29&m=10&y=...
> >>> MAKKAH: A woman who killed and tortured her seven-year-old stepdaughter
> >>> has been sentenced to death by a General Court in Makkah. The woman’s
> >>> husband, who is the child’s biological father, was sentenced to 15 years
> >>> in jail.
> >> One thing I'll give the arselifters, at least they do hand
> >> out suitable sentences for crimes like this. I'm sure you've
> >> seen in the news several instances recently of Australians
> >> doing similar things to their kids, but our pissweak courts
> >> have only handed out relatively short sentences.
>
> > Yes and I'm sure the trials in such islamopig shitocracies
> > are fair and judicious and the appeals process rigorous. ;^)
>
> Must be. The bint gets executed while the man gets 15 years.
>

But the actions of muzzie fucks shouldn't reflect on them or their
religion. After all, most muzzies are good people, as Seonie and
BlowJob keep
telling me.

Looking at

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Charter_of_Fundamental_Rights_of_the_European_Union

It looks, to me, that the major change within the UK will be the 
disappearance of paper boys under 16...

-- 
William Black

"Any number under six"

The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of 
Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat 
single handed with a quarterstaff.

William Black wrote:
> Looking at
>
> http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Charter_of_Fundamental_Rights_of_the_European_Union
>
> It looks, to me, that the major change within the UK will be the
> disappearance of paper boys under 16...

Doesn't the UK have an opt-out on the CoFR?

Lou Ravi wrote:
> William Black wrote:
>> Looking at
>>
>> http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Charter_of_Fundamental_Rights_of_the_European_Union
>>
>> It looks, to me, that the major change within the UK will be the
>> disappearance of paper boys under 16...
> 
> Doesn't the UK have an opt-out on the CoFR? 
> 
> 

I doubt they'll bother on that one.

Under age employment in the UK has been a running sore for decades.


-- 
William Black

"Any number under six"

The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of 
Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat 
single handed with a quarterstaff.

-- 
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics 
 energy, education, politics, etc over 1 million document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  all that is necessary for       []     walk quietly and carry
  the triumph of evil is that     []           a big stick.
  good people do nothing     []    trust actions not words
                    only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"abelard"  wrote in message 
news:1b93f5tubqmhbqbebgjrslfadchlf2gkb5@4ax.com...

http://grahnlaw.blogspot.com/2009/05/britain-and-eu-how-to-deform-treaty_31.html

"Conclusion

Under the Lisbon Treaty, limitations of EU powers or opt-outs from internal 
policy areas would be marginally easier from a legal point of view, but are 
they politically viable?

The UK's record as an obstructionist member is solid and the Conservative 
Party promises even more contempt for its European partners and their common 
aims.

The EU member states would be foolish to cringe before a member state 
without loyalty and solidarity.

If even one member state stands up against Britian's irresponsible 
behaviour, the plan to deform the treaty crashes.

David Cameron and William Hague would probably have to call a referendum on 
Britain's EU membership.

The European Union could offer ex-member Britain a privileged partnership."

******

We hear a lot of references to Article 48 no?

On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 16:29:45 -0000, "Aramis Gunton"
 wrote:

>"abelard"  wrote in message 
>news:1b93f5tubqmhbqbebgjrslfadchlf2gkb5@4ax.com...
>
>http://grahnlaw.blogspot.com/2009/05/britain-and-eu-how-to-deform-treaty_31.html
>
>"Conclusion
>
>Under the Lisbon Treaty, limitations of EU powers or opt-outs from internal 
>policy areas would be marginally easier from a legal point of view, but are 
>they politically viable?
>
>The UK's record as an obstructionist member is solid and the Conservative 
>Party promises even more contempt for its European partners and their common 
>aims.
>
>The EU member states would be foolish to cringe before a member state 
>without loyalty and solidarity.
>
>If even one member state stands up against Britian's irresponsible 
>behaviour, the plan to deform the treaty crashes.

that's absolute nonsense...
the eussr is not yet powerful enough do go that route...

they regularly cave in and resort to bribery and appeasement...
    eg ireland and czech....
they also turn a blind eye to constant at two fingers from germany
     and france...
almost all the eu countries are already in breach of the so-called
    stability pact...

>David Cameron and William Hague would probably have to call a referendum on 
>Britain's EU membership.
>
>The European Union could offer ex-member Britain a privileged partnership."
>
>******
>
>We hear a lot of references to Article 48 no? 

save my work and tell me what that is...

regards

-- 
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics 
 energy, education, politics, etc over 1 million document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  all that is necessary for       []     walk quietly and carry
  the triumph of evil is that     []           a big stick.
  good people do nothing     []    trust actions not words
                    only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"abelard"  wrote in message 
news:tic3f51qc1g43ajl36d1j4o0iba5f1ij7o@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 16:29:45 -0000, "Aramis Gunton"
>  wrote:
>
>>"abelard"  wrote in message
>>news:1b93f5tubqmhbqbebgjrslfadchlf2gkb5@4ax.com...
>>
>>http://grahnlaw.blogspot.com/2009/05/britain-and-eu-how-to-deform-treaty_31.html
>>
>>"Conclusion
>>
>>Under the Lisbon Treaty, limitations of EU powers or opt-outs from 
>>internal
>>policy areas would be marginally easier from a legal point of view, but 
>>are
>>they politically viable?
>>
>>The UK's record as an obstructionist member is solid and the Conservative
>>Party promises even more contempt for its European partners and their 
>>common
>>aims.
>>
>>The EU member states would be foolish to cringe before a member state
>>without loyalty and solidarity.
>>
>>If even one member state stands up against Britian's irresponsible
>>behaviour, the plan to deform the treaty crashes.
>
> that's absolute nonsense...

Grahn is notoriously anti-British. An emotional screecher. It must be hell 
to deal with him on a professional basis.

> the eussr is not yet powerful enough do go that route...
>
> they regularly cave in and resort to bribery and appeasement...
>    eg ireland and czech....
> they also turn a blind eye to constant at two fingers from germany
>     and france...
> almost all the eu countries are already in breach of the so-called
>    stability pact...
>
>>David Cameron and William Hague would probably have to call a referendum 
>>on
>>Britain's EU membership.
>>
>>The European Union could offer ex-member Britain a privileged 
>>partnership."
>>
>>******
>>
>>We hear a lot of references to Article 48 no?

Self-amending or ratchet clause.

It allows the European Council to bully dissenting member states into 
approving changes to the Treaties without referendum.

>
> save my work and tell me what that is...
>
> regards
>
> -- 
> web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics
> energy, education, politics, etc over 1 million document calls in year 
> past
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  all that is necessary for       []     walk quietly and carry
>  the triumph of evil is that     []           a big stick.
>  good people do nothing     []    trust actions not words
>                    only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 17:13:19 -0000, "DVH"  wrote:

>
>"abelard"  wrote in message 
>news:tic3f51qc1g43ajl36d1j4o0iba5f1ij7o@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 16:29:45 -0000, "Aramis Gunton"
>>  wrote:
>>
>>>"abelard"  wrote in message
>>>news:1b93f5tubqmhbqbebgjrslfadchlf2gkb5@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>http://grahnlaw.blogspot.com/2009/05/britain-and-eu-how-to-deform-treaty_31.html
>>>
>>>"Conclusion
>>>
>>>Under the Lisbon Treaty, limitations of EU powers or opt-outs from 
>>>internal
>>>policy areas would be marginally easier from a legal point of view, but 
>>>are
>>>they politically viable?
>>>
>>>The UK's record as an obstructionist member is solid and the Conservative
>>>Party promises even more contempt for its European partners and their 
>>>common
>>>aims.
>>>
>>>The EU member states would be foolish to cringe before a member state
>>>without loyalty and solidarity.
>>>
>>>If even one member state stands up against Britian's irresponsible
>>>behaviour, the plan to deform the treaty crashes.
>>
>> that's absolute nonsense...
>
>Grahn is notoriously anti-British. An emotional screecher. It must be hell 
>to deal with him on a professional basis.

ok

>> the eussr is not yet powerful enough do go that route...
>>
>> they regularly cave in and resort to bribery and appeasement...
>>    eg ireland and czech....
>> they also turn a blind eye to constant at two fingers from germany
>>     and france...
>> almost all the eu countries are already in breach of the so-called
>>    stability pact...
>>
>>>David Cameron and William Hague would probably have to call a referendum 
>>>on
>>>Britain's EU membership.
>>>
>>>The European Union could offer ex-member Britain a privileged 
>>>partnership."
>>>
>>>******
>>>
>>>We hear a lot of references to Article 48 no?
>
>Self-amending or ratchet clause.
>
>It allows the European Council to bully dissenting member states into 
>approving changes to the Treaties without referendum.

thanx...looks like cameron is targeting it....
further, i doubt cameron is nearly so vulnerable to bribery
    and threats as ireland and czech

regards

>> save my work and tell me what that is...

-- 
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics 
 energy, education, politics, etc over 1 million document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  all that is necessary for       []     walk quietly and carry
  the triumph of evil is that     []           a big stick.
  good people do nothing     []    trust actions not words
                    only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"abelard"  wrote in message 
news:kef3f5t5o6njr6bts7th8pujtsgu6cc8b9@4ax.com...

>>>>We hear a lot of references to Article 48 no?
>>
>>Self-amending or ratchet clause.
>>
>>It allows the European Council to bully dissenting member states into
>>approving changes to the Treaties without referendum.
>
> thanx...looks like cameron is targeting it....
> further, i doubt cameron is nearly so vulnerable to bribery
>    and threats as ireland and czech

But were not the bribery and threats *only* required prior to the 
ratification.

The 'opt outs' such as they are were surely just sweeteners to ensure the 
medicine, post ratification, goes down smoothly.

As Cameron states in respect of the 'difficulties', he will need the 
agreement of *all* 27 members.

The treaty juggernaut is now in place!!!!

On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 18:07:06 -0000, "Aramis Gunton"
 wrote:

>"abelard"  wrote in message 
>news:kef3f5t5o6njr6bts7th8pujtsgu6cc8b9@4ax.com...
>
>>>>>We hear a lot of references to Article 48 no?
>>>
>>>Self-amending or ratchet clause.
>>>
>>>It allows the European Council to bully dissenting member states into
>>>approving changes to the Treaties without referendum.
>>
>> thanx...looks like cameron is targeting it....
>> further, i doubt cameron is nearly so vulnerable to bribery
>>    and threats as ireland and czech
>
>But were not the bribery and threats *only* required prior to the 
>ratification.
>
>The 'opt outs' such as they are were surely just sweeteners to ensure the 
>medicine, post ratification, goes down smoothly.
>
>As Cameron states in respect of the 'difficulties', he will need the 
>agreement of *all* 27 members.

sane operators don't start 'negotiations' with open threats

>The treaty juggernaut is now in place!!!! 

and as stated...i believe that juggernaut is made of tissue paper...
so far

regards

-- 
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics 
 energy, education, politics, etc over 1 million document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  all that is necessary for       []     walk quietly and carry
  the triumph of evil is that     []           a big stick.
  good people do nothing     []    trust actions not words
                    only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"abelard"  wrote in message 
news:3ug3f5lvkrka2tohu6k62oel8g2ccci7dh@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 18:07:06 -0000, "Aramis Gunton"
>  wrote:
>
>>"abelard"  wrote in message
>>news:kef3f5t5o6njr6bts7th8pujtsgu6cc8b9@4ax.com...
>>
>>>>>>We hear a lot of references to Article 48 no?
>>>>
>>>>Self-amending or ratchet clause.
>>>>
>>>>It allows the European Council to bully dissenting member states into
>>>>approving changes to the Treaties without referendum.
>>>
>>> thanx...looks like cameron is targeting it....
>>> further, i doubt cameron is nearly so vulnerable to bribery
>>>    and threats as ireland and czech
>>
>>But were not the bribery and threats *only* required prior to the
>>ratification.
>>
>>The 'opt outs' such as they are were surely just sweeteners to ensure the
>>medicine, post ratification, goes down smoothly.
>>
>>As Cameron states in respect of the 'difficulties', he will need the
>>agreement of *all* 27 members.
>
> sane operators don't start 'negotiations' with open threats

I firmly believe the whole speech today was designed simply as a deflection 
for the potential irritants within his own party.

I mean he even pontificated upon failure but sensibly put any remedial 
action off until the next but one parliament. Cheeky Dave!!

Must be nice to have one's hands tied but still get to eat at the master's 
table.

Let's hear it again Dave:

"Clearly we will be asked the question: what if you cannot get these 
guarantees and what if Europe continues to head in the wrong, centralising 
direction? Let me answer that question in advance.

Well, if that were to happen, then of course we can return to this subject 
in a manifesto for the parliament after the next one."

I like that.... No!! Really I do.

There they are bedding the stuff in all manner of concrete and steel heading 
in the 'wrong centralising direction' and what are we promised Dave will 
do....????

Errrr....???

Oh right. Have a ponder on it some 5 year down the line.

>
>>The treaty juggernaut is now in place!!!!
>
> and as stated...i believe that juggernaut is made of tissue paper...
> so far

Really!!!??

Time to strike is surely now then before the masonry and ironwork is firmly 
in place.

You see we don't need bribing or threatening because 'we' have already 
signed up to the treaty lock stock and barrel. A bit late now to start 
blubbering that we don't want items x,y and z when the ink is hardly dry on 
'our' signature stating *exactly* that x,y,and z is fine by 'us' 
governor!!!!

On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 21:12:09 -0000, "Aramis Gunton"
 wrote:

>"abelard"  wrote in message 
>news:3ug3f5lvkrka2tohu6k62oel8g2ccci7dh@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 18:07:06 -0000, "Aramis Gunton"
>>  wrote:
>>
>>>"abelard"  wrote in message
>>>news:kef3f5t5o6njr6bts7th8pujtsgu6cc8b9@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>>>>>We hear a lot of references to Article 48 no?
>>>>>
>>>>>Self-amending or ratchet clause.
>>>>>
>>>>>It allows the European Council to bully dissenting member states into
>>>>>approving changes to the Treaties without referendum.
>>>>
>>>> thanx...looks like cameron is targeting it....
>>>> further, i doubt cameron is nearly so vulnerable to bribery
>>>>    and threats as ireland and czech
>>>
>>>But were not the bribery and threats *only* required prior to the
>>>ratification.
>>>
>>>The 'opt outs' such as they are were surely just sweeteners to ensure the
>>>medicine, post ratification, goes down smoothly.
>>>
>>>As Cameron states in respect of the 'difficulties', he will need the
>>>agreement of *all* 27 members.
>>
>> sane operators don't start 'negotiations' with open threats
>
>I firmly believe the whole speech today was designed simply as a deflection 
>for the potential irritants within his own party.

i don't mind you believing that

>I mean he even pontificated upon failure but sensibly put any remedial 
>action off until the next but one parliament. Cheeky Dave!!

no, he talked about both of the next two terms

>Must be nice to have one's hands tied but still get to eat at the master's 
>table.
>
>Let's hear it again Dave:
>
>"Clearly we will be asked the question: what if you cannot get these 
>guarantees and what if Europe continues to head in the wrong, centralising 
>direction? Let me answer that question in advance.
>
>Well, if that were to happen, then of course we can return to this subject 
>in a manifesto for the parliament after the next one."
>
>I like that.... No!! Really I do.

it hasn't happened yet...it's illogical to deal with things that
    haven't happened and may never happen

>There they are bedding the stuff in all manner of concrete and steel heading 
>in the 'wrong centralising direction' and what are we promised Dave will 
>do....????
>
>Errrr....???
>
>Oh right. Have a ponder on it some 5 year down the line.
>
>>
>>>The treaty juggernaut is now in place!!!!
>>
>> and as stated...i believe that juggernaut is made of tissue paper...
>> so far
>
>Really!!!??
>
>Time to strike is surely now then before the masonry and ironwork is firmly 
>in place.

upon that i fully agree

>You see we don't need bribing or threatening because 'we' have already 
>signed up to the treaty lock stock and barrel. A bit late now to start 
>blubbering that we don't want items x,y and z when the ink is hardly dry on 
>'our' signature stating *exactly* that x,y,and z is fine by 'us' 
>governor!!!!

it has been signed up to by a crooked unelected 'pm'
it has no serious legitimacy....

ps, keep in mind when cameron gave his pledge (on 
    the fake constitution)....the clown was then hoping/threatening
    to go for a quick erection...

he has since hung on while the socialist ship and the country
    founders...i question just why he did that

regards

-- 
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics 
 energy, education, politics, etc over 1 million document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  all that is necessary for       []     walk quietly and carry
  the triumph of evil is that     []           a big stick.
  good people do nothing     []    trust actions not words
                    only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

abelard wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 18:07:06 -0000, "Aramis Gunton"
>  wrote:
> 
>> "abelard"  wrote in message 
>> news:kef3f5t5o6njr6bts7th8pujtsgu6cc8b9@4ax.com...
>>
>>>>>> We hear a lot of references to Article 48 no?
>>>> Self-amending or ratchet clause.
>>>>
>>>> It allows the European Council to bully dissenting member states into
>>>> approving changes to the Treaties without referendum.
>>> thanx...looks like cameron is targeting it....
>>> further, i doubt cameron is nearly so vulnerable to bribery
>>>    and threats as ireland and czech
>> But were not the bribery and threats *only* required prior to the 
>> ratification.
>>
>> The 'opt outs' such as they are were surely just sweeteners to ensure the 
>> medicine, post ratification, goes down smoothly.
>>
>> As Cameron states in respect of the 'difficulties', he will need the 
>> agreement of *all* 27 members.
> 
> sane operators don't start 'negotiations' with open threats
> 
>> The treaty juggernaut is now in place!!!! 
> 
> and as stated...i believe that juggernaut is made of tissue paper...

If that is so then why has the EU Constitution survived rejection in 
several referenda, to be on the brink of coming into force and will 
likely be in force by the end of the year?

James


-- 
James Hammerton,
http://jameshammerton.blogspot.com/
http://www.magnacartaplus.org/news/

On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:37:16 +0000, James Hammerton
 wrote:

>abelard wrote:
>> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 18:07:06 -0000, "Aramis Gunton"
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>> "abelard"  wrote in message 
>>> news:kef3f5t5o6njr6bts7th8pujtsgu6cc8b9@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>>>>> We hear a lot of references to Article 48 no?
>>>>> Self-amending or ratchet clause.
>>>>>
>>>>> It allows the European Council to bully dissenting member states into
>>>>> approving changes to the Treaties without referendum.
>>>> thanx...looks like cameron is targeting it....
>>>> further, i doubt cameron is nearly so vulnerable to bribery
>>>>    and threats as ireland and czech
>>> But were not the bribery and threats *only* required prior to the 
>>> ratification.
>>>
>>> The 'opt outs' such as they are were surely just sweeteners to ensure the 
>>> medicine, post ratification, goes down smoothly.
>>>
>>> As Cameron states in respect of the 'difficulties', he will need the 
>>> agreement of *all* 27 members.
>> 
>> sane operators don't start 'negotiations' with open threats
>> 
>>> The treaty juggernaut is now in place!!!! 
>> 
>> and as stated...i believe that juggernaut is made of tissue paper...
>
>If that is so then why has the EU Constitution survived rejection in 
>several referenda, to be on the brink of coming into force and will 
>likely be in force by the end of the year?

because most states just ignore much of eussr 'directives'

imv you are not defining 'force' adequately

regards

-- 
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics 
 energy, education, politics, etc over 1 million document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  all that is necessary for       []     walk quietly and carry
  the triumph of evil is that     []           a big stick.
  good people do nothing     []    trust actions not words
                    only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

abelard wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:37:16 +0000, James Hammerton
>  wrote:
> 
>> abelard wrote:
>>> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 18:07:06 -0000, "Aramis Gunton"
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> "abelard"  wrote in message 
>>>> news:kef3f5t5o6njr6bts7th8pujtsgu6cc8b9@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>>>>> We hear a lot of references to Article 48 no?
>>>>>> Self-amending or ratchet clause.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It allows the European Council to bully dissenting member states into
>>>>>> approving changes to the Treaties without referendum.
>>>>> thanx...looks like cameron is targeting it....
>>>>> further, i doubt cameron is nearly so vulnerable to bribery
>>>>>    and threats as ireland and czech
>>>> But were not the bribery and threats *only* required prior to the 
>>>> ratification.
>>>>
>>>> The 'opt outs' such as they are were surely just sweeteners to ensure the 
>>>> medicine, post ratification, goes down smoothly.
>>>>
>>>> As Cameron states in respect of the 'difficulties', he will need the 
>>>> agreement of *all* 27 members.
>>> sane operators don't start 'negotiations' with open threats
>>>
>>>> The treaty juggernaut is now in place!!!! 
>>> and as stated...i believe that juggernaut is made of tissue paper...
>> If that is so then why has the EU Constitution survived rejection in 
>> several referenda, to be on the brink of coming into force and will 
>> likely be in force by the end of the year?
> 
> because most states just ignore much of eussr 'directives'

Are you suggesting we could simply ignore Lisbon and act as if it had 
never seen the light of day?

> 
> imv you are not defining 'force' adequately

My understanding is that it could become part of the law here in Britain 
and across the EU by the end of the year. Am I incorrect?

James

-- 
James Hammerton,
http://jameshammerton.blogspot.com/
http://www.magnacartaplus.org/news/

On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:51:27 +0000, James Hammerton
 wrote:

>abelard wrote:
>> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:37:16 +0000, James Hammerton
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>> abelard wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 18:07:06 -0000, "Aramis Gunton"
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "abelard"  wrote in message 
>>>>> news:kef3f5t5o6njr6bts7th8pujtsgu6cc8b9@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We hear a lot of references to Article 48 no?
>>>>>>> Self-amending or ratchet clause.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It allows the European Council to bully dissenting member states into
>>>>>>> approving changes to the Treaties without referendum.
>>>>>> thanx...looks like cameron is targeting it....
>>>>>> further, i doubt cameron is nearly so vulnerable to bribery
>>>>>>    and threats as ireland and czech
>>>>> But were not the bribery and threats *only* required prior to the 
>>>>> ratification.
>>>>>
>>>>> The 'opt outs' such as they are were surely just sweeteners to ensure the 
>>>>> medicine, post ratification, goes down smoothly.
>>>>>
>>>>> As Cameron states in respect of the 'difficulties', he will need the 
>>>>> agreement of *all* 27 members.
>>>> sane operators don't start 'negotiations' with open threats
>>>>
>>>>> The treaty juggernaut is now in place!!!! 
>>>> and as stated...i believe that juggernaut is made of tissue paper...
>>> If that is so then why has the EU Constitution survived rejection in 
>>> several referenda, to be on the brink of coming into force and will 
>>> likely be in force by the end of the year?
>> 
>> because most states just ignore much of eussr 'directives'
>
>Are you suggesting we could simply ignore Lisbon and act as if it had 
>never seen the light of day?

certainly...and easily

>> imv you are not defining 'force' adequately
>
>My understanding is that it could become part of the law here in Britain 
>and across the EU by the end of the year. Am I incorrect?

it is far too complex and some of it is at least as good
    as the uk under this socialist government....with its constant
    intrusion on civil liberties...

i still see no attention to 'force'

a uk bill of rights matters

regards

-- 
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics 
 energy, education, politics, etc over 1 million document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  all that is necessary for       []     walk quietly and carry
  the triumph of evil is that     []           a big stick.
  good people do nothing     []    trust actions not words
                    only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

abelard wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:51:27 +0000, James Hammerton
>  wrote:
> 
>> abelard wrote:
>>> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:37:16 +0000, James Hammerton
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> abelard wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 18:07:06 -0000, "Aramis Gunton"
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "abelard"  wrote in message 
>>>>>> news:kef3f5t5o6njr6bts7th8pujtsgu6cc8b9@4ax.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> We hear a lot of references to Article 48 no?
>>>>>>>> Self-amending or ratchet clause.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It allows the European Council to bully dissenting member states into
>>>>>>>> approving changes to the Treaties without referendum.
>>>>>>> thanx...looks like cameron is targeting it....
>>>>>>> further, i doubt cameron is nearly so vulnerable to bribery
>>>>>>>    and threats as ireland and czech
>>>>>> But were not the bribery and threats *only* required prior to the 
>>>>>> ratification.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The 'opt outs' such as they are were surely just sweeteners to ensure the 
>>>>>> medicine, post ratification, goes down smoothly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As Cameron states in respect of the 'difficulties', he will need the 
>>>>>> agreement of *all* 27 members.
>>>>> sane operators don't start 'negotiations' with open threats
>>>>>
>>>>>> The treaty juggernaut is now in place!!!! 
>>>>> and as stated...i believe that juggernaut is made of tissue paper...
>>>> If that is so then why has the EU Constitution survived rejection in 
>>>> several referenda, to be on the brink of coming into force and will 
>>>> likely be in force by the end of the year?
>>> because most states just ignore much of eussr 'directives'
>> Are you suggesting we could simply ignore Lisbon and act as if it had 
>> never seen the light of day?
> 
> certainly...and easily
> 
>>> imv you are not defining 'force' adequately
>> My understanding is that it could become part of the law here in Britain 
>> and across the EU by the end of the year. Am I incorrect?
> 
> it is far too complex and some of it is at least as good
>     as the uk under this socialist government....with its constant
>     intrusion on civil liberties...
> 
> i still see no attention to 'force'

I mean the treaty will be "in force" in the same way that e.g. the RIP 
Act is currently "in force". I.e. courts and other institutions of the 
state will treat it as part of the law. Hence my comment about it being 
part of the law in Britain and across the EU.

> a uk bill of rights matters

Agreed, but what if it conflicts with the EU constitution?

James

-- 
James Hammerton,
http://jameshammerton.blogspot.com/
http://www.magnacartaplus.org/news/

James Hammerton wrote:
[Abelard:]
>> a uk bill of rights matters
> Agreed, but what if it conflicts with the EU constitution?

  (a) As a matter of practical politics, this seems unlikely.  A
BoR is mainly about drawing lines in the sand, not about making
"real" laws;  likewise a constitution.  The EU's lines in the sand
are mostly parallel to ours, and where they aren't, they probably
ought to be.  There is no very interesting reason why, eg, our
laws on detention without trial should be very different from the
similar laws in France or Italy or wherever.

  (b) But if there is, nevertheless, a conflict, then there is a
Problem.  EU practice, except in the UK, seems to have been to
ignore Problems as long as possible.  If that fails, and push
comes to shove, then the EU can huff and puff as much as it likes,
it's still up to us to decide how much notice we take.  A BoR at
least means that we can ignore them and/or tell them it's *their*
problem, not ours.  "Sorry, in the UK, we can't do X, you'll have
to find some other way ...."

  (c) If all else fails, the EU still has no executive power.  They
aren't going to invade.  They aren't going to expel us.  They have
no effective sanctions.  They can't force us to pay fines.  As long
as we smile sweetly at them and are annoyingly reasonable, nothing
of any consequence will follow.  It's important to distinguish real
from paper powers;  Lisbon is no more real than the Laws of Cricket.

  (d) In similar vein, a BoR is equally only a paper power.  Nothing
in a BoR [or in the EU constitution] will protect us from tyranny,
or from an army coup, or from the collapse of the banking system, or
from plague or famine.  That's not to say that we shouldn't have one.
But it's a statement of intent rather than anything with teeth.

-- 
Andy Walker
Nottingham