TheRPGSite

Fan Forums => The RPGPundit's Own Forum => Topic started by: Battlemaster on July 07, 2022, 02:52:42 PM

Title: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Battlemaster on July 07, 2022, 02:52:42 PM
Just heard bojo the clown is stepping down. I'm kinda curious about what this means about good old Albion. I suppose I may have a Britt or two in my family tree after all.

Is there a major shift in Britt politics underway? What direction is it going? Who'se likely to be moving into 10 downing?  (God I hope it isn't Carl benjamin...)
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Shasarak on July 07, 2022, 05:05:03 PM
I heard it was Sargon of Akkad.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: oggsmash on July 07, 2022, 05:42:47 PM
 Ah good old Carl/Sargon...whitest black man I ever saw in my life (and that includes a kid I knew who was an albino). 
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 07, 2022, 06:41:46 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D4cJ2EZX4AAkZ0z?format=jpg&name=small)

Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Battlemaster on July 07, 2022, 10:07:21 PM
I heard it was Sargon of Akkad.


You mean sukken on akkok?
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Shasarak on July 07, 2022, 10:28:44 PM
I heard it was Sargon of Akkad.


You mean sukken on akkok?

Depends how fat your fingers are
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: jeff37923 on July 08, 2022, 06:26:45 AM
Well, you can start by not calling the people you want to explain this to "murkans".

OK, groomer?
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Kiero on July 08, 2022, 06:34:13 AM
He's too weak to do the globalists bidding, so they need a new puppet. One who can ram through all the Great Reset bullshit that he failed to.

He will stay on as PM until his party elects a new leader, likely in the autumn.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Battlemaster on July 08, 2022, 07:58:54 AM
He's too weak to do the globalists bidding, so they need a new puppet. One who can ram through all the Great Reset bullshit that he failed to.

He will stay on as PM until his party elects a new leader, likely in the autumn.

OK, any favorites? Hopefully it won't look like a slightly altered clone of that thing that was in the Whitehouse from 2017-2021.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Battlemaster on July 08, 2022, 08:41:08 PM
Anyone know what he did to piss people off so much? Did the people who voted for Brexit now blame him for the problems I hear it's caused England?
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Shasarak on July 09, 2022, 12:56:34 AM
Yeah, it turns out that the English people dont really want to send any money to Ukraine.

Who would have guessed?
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: TrekkieKT on July 09, 2022, 06:39:07 AM
Anyone know what he did to piss people off so much? Did the people who voted for Brexit now blame him for the problems I hear it's caused England?

During the lockdown periods in the UK, he hosted a number of parties in Number 10 (UK PM's residence) that pissed a lot of the public off.
Sorta a do what I say, not what I do hypocrisy.

There was also political scandals, corruption, banging his now wife before divorcing the last one.

Combine that with the economic issues globally caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine, being compounded by the preexisting economic issues of Brexit, and the Conservative Party are 10 points behind Labour in the polls e.g. electorally fucked given the UK electoral system.


For reference his "massive mandate" from the 2019 election was based on picking up ~50 Labour seats in the north of England, all of which are held on 2-3% margins.
The current polling flips those seats RIGHT back to Labour.

This was seen in a number of recent by-elections where Labour and the LibDems smashed Tory candidates.

The members of his party looked at all this and last month Boris barely survived a vote of confidence in his leadership of the party.

The proverbial straw was him appointing a Conservative MP (named Pincher of all things) with a long history of allegations of sexual misconduct to a senior party position.
Boris knew about this, commenting "Pincher by name, Pincher by nature" but lied and said he didn't.

Pincher got caught out, resigned his new post, and a senior member of Cabinet called Boris on it.
Boris fired him.

The rest of the cabinet looked at this and 60 members resigned in under 48 hours in digust.

So Boris has resigned as leader of the Conservative Party and committed to remaining as caretaker PM until the Conservative Party elect a new leader.

Should happen around September or so.

There's the potential that the Opposition parties in Parliament call a vote of no-confidence on Monday: it's unlikely to pass as ~35 members of the government themselves would have to vote to bring it down but if they did...

The Conservatives MIGHT be able to appoint some inoffensive member as a Caretaker PM until their leadership election but it wouldn't be any of their leadership candidates (none of them would allow it as it'd put that person into too good a position to win the office) but they also wouldn't support a Labour PM.

In that case probably the best constitutional position is that the Queen invites someone to be sworn in as PM (Keir Starmer, someone from the SNP) and that person's first and last act as PM is to advise Her Maj to call an election.

Let the voters sort it all out.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Battlemaster on July 09, 2022, 11:40:29 AM
Yeah, it turns out that the English people dont really want to send any money to Ukraine.

Who would have guessed?

Hmmm, I guess the britts aren't much better at history than Americans are. They should have remembered how Chamberlain let uncle 'dolf have a few countries that they didn't care about and how THAT went for them.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Shasarak on July 09, 2022, 05:34:29 PM
Yeah, it turns out that the English people dont really want to send any money to Ukraine.

Who would have guessed?

Hmmm, I guess the britts aren't much better at history than Americans are. They should have remembered how Chamberlain let uncle 'dolf have a few countries that they didn't care about and how THAT went for them.

It turns out that it went pretty good for them.  It was all gravy until Bush ruined it all according to Battlemaster
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 09, 2022, 07:27:54 PM
He's too weak to do the globalists bidding, so they need a new puppet. One who can ram through all the Great Reset bullshit that he failed to.

He will stay on as PM until his party elects a new leader, likely in the autumn.

You really need to expand on this because going on the duck test it look like your a mental conspiracy theorist. The reality is that he lied a lot, which is a Boris thing, until his ministers finally had enough and started resigning. That's a clear nn mental reason.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Battlemaster on July 09, 2022, 08:01:30 PM
Yeah, it turns out that the English people dont really want to send any money to Ukraine.

Who would have guessed?

Hmmm, I guess the britts aren't much better at history than Americans are. They should have remembered how Chamberlain let uncle 'dolf have a few countries that they didn't care about and how THAT went for them.

It turns out that it went pretty good for them.  It was all gravy until Bush ruined it all according to Battlemaster

What the fuck did you just say?

The britts abd French let Hitler swallow up several countries until finally going to war with him over poland, by then he was powerful enough to conquer France and bomb the fuck out of England during the blitz. If they'd stopped him sooner neither would have suffered what it did. Putin is trying to rebuild the radioacrice trainwreck called Russia by eating other countries sbd needs to be stopped now.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 09, 2022, 08:09:30 PM
This is all really strange as the resignation of the British PM has fuck all to fo with Ukraine. It's an entirely internal matter of the ruling party. There may be consequences to the Ukrainian situation but that's not the same.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Shasarak on July 09, 2022, 08:13:12 PM
Yeah, it turns out that the English people dont really want to send any money to Ukraine.

Who would have guessed?

Hmmm, I guess the britts aren't much better at history than Americans are. They should have remembered how Chamberlain let uncle 'dolf have a few countries that they didn't care about and how THAT went for them.

It turns out that it went pretty good for them.  It was all gravy until Bush ruined it all according to Battlemaster

What the fuck did you just say?

The britts abd French let Hitler swallow up several countries until finally going to war with him over poland, by then he was powerful enough to conquer France and bomb the fuck out of England during the blitz. If they'd stopped him sooner neither would have suffered what it did. Putin is trying to rebuild the radioacrice trainwreck called Russia by eating other countries sbd needs to be stopped now.

Yeah and then it worked out great after that.

I bet that you dont even think twice now when you go out driving your BMW while wearing your lederhosen and eating your Sauerkraut?

Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Battlemaster on July 09, 2022, 08:17:16 PM
This is all really strange as the resignation of the British PM has fuck all to fo with Ukraine. It's an entirely internal matter of the ruling party. There may be consequences to the Ukrainian situation but that's not the same.

Maybe the new pm will change Britain's stance on ukraine.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Battlemaster on July 09, 2022, 08:18:50 PM
Yeah, it turns out that the English people dont really want to send any money to Ukraine.

Who would have guessed?

Hmmm, I guess the britts aren't much better at history than Americans are. They should have remembered how Chamberlain let uncle 'dolf have a few countries that they didn't care about and how THAT went for them.

It turns out that it went pretty good for them.  It was all gravy until Bush ruined it all according to Battlemaster

What the fuck did you just say?

The britts abd French let Hitler swallow up several countries until finally going to war with him over poland, by then he was powerful enough to conquer France and bomb the fuck out of England during the blitz. If they'd stopped him sooner neither would have suffered what it did. Putin is trying to rebuild the radioacrice trainwreck called Russia by eating other countries sbd needs to be stopped now.

Yeah and then it worked out great after that.

I bet that you dont even think twice now when you go out driving your BMW while wearing your lederhosen and eating your Sauerkraut?

Yeah I'm so sure the average Britt today wouldn't mind being bombed by Russia so future generations s could have....vodka? Caviar? Borscht? Potato soup?
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: oggsmash on July 09, 2022, 08:19:25 PM
Yeah, it turns out that the English people dont really want to send any money to Ukraine.

Who would have guessed?

Hmmm, I guess the britts aren't much better at history than Americans are. They should have remembered how Chamberlain let uncle 'dolf have a few countries that they didn't care about and how THAT went for them.

  Comparing Ukraine to Hitler's expansion tells me you know as much about history as you do about nuclear power.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Battlemaster on July 09, 2022, 09:17:16 PM
Yeah, it turns out that the English people dont really want to send any money to Ukraine.

Who would have guessed?

Hmmm, I guess the britts aren't much better at history than Americans are. They should have remembered how Chamberlain let uncle 'dolf have a few countries that they didn't care about and how THAT went for them.

  Comparing Ukraine to Hitler's expansion tells me you know as much about history as you do about nuclear power.

Dolf's first grab was Austria, and he used the same justification. It was ethnically part if Germany.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: jeff37923 on July 09, 2022, 10:16:45 PM
Yeah, it turns out that the English people dont really want to send any money to Ukraine.

Who would have guessed?

Hmmm, I guess the britts aren't much better at history than Americans are. They should have remembered how Chamberlain let uncle 'dolf have a few countries that they didn't care about and how THAT went for them.

  Comparing Ukraine to Hitler's expansion tells me you know as much about history as you do about nuclear power.

Dolf's first grab was Austria, and he used the same justification. It was ethnically part if Germany.

You really should just quit while you are, behind?
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 10, 2022, 05:07:44 AM
This is all really strange as the resignation of the British PM has fuck all to fo with Ukraine. It's an entirely internal matter of the ruling party. There may be consequences to the Ukrainian situation but that's not the same.

Maybe the new pm will change Britain's stance on ukraine.
Mibbe eh, mibbe naw. It's not relevant at this moment.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Kiero on July 10, 2022, 08:41:10 AM
You really need to expand on this because going on the duck test it look like your a mental conspiracy theorist. The reality is that he lied a lot, which is a Boris thing, until his ministers finally had enough and started resigning. That's a clear nn mental reason.

The reality is he should have resigned over failing to leave the EU, all the completely unnecessary covid shite and deliberately impoverishing everyone with the Net Zero eco-bollocks. Instead, he resigns over one of his MPs getting handsy in a club? Please.

No different to Wanksock resigning over his staged affair, rather than being investigated over what he ordered during the aforementioned covid shite.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Eirikrautha on July 10, 2022, 08:51:22 AM
You really need to expand on this because going on the duck test it look like your a mental conspiracy theorist. The reality is that he lied a lot, which is a Boris thing, until his ministers finally had enough and started resigning. That's a clear nn mental reason.

The reality is he should have resigned over failing to leave the EU, all the completely unnecessary covid shite and deliberately impoverishing everyone with the Net Zero eco-bollocks. Instead, he resigns over one of his MPs getting handsy in a club? Please.

No different to Wanksock resigning over his staged affair, rather than being investigated over what he ordered during the aforementioned covid shite.

You just hit on the real reason he was ousted.  He campaigned as a populist, and was elected by gathering blue collar voters who were traditionally labor but liked his brexit and other stances.  Then, post-Covid, he governed like a traditional leftist, with Covid lockdowns, pro-immigration policies, and cozying up to the Eco-nuts.  This is why he's gone, because his own party knows he's pissed off the voters that elected him to the point that he's wrecking the brand.  All the other stuff is just a façade.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Chris24601 on July 10, 2022, 11:40:45 AM
He's too weak to do the globalists bidding, so they need a new puppet. One who can ram through all the Great Reset bullshit that he failed to.

He will stay on as PM until his party elects a new leader, likely in the autumn.

You really need to expand on this because going on the duck test it look like your a mental conspiracy theorist. The reality is that he lied a lot, which is a Boris thing, until his ministers finally had enough and started resigning. That's a clear nn mental reason.
These days the average conspiracy theory has a life of maybe three months before it’s confirmed as fact. Let’s see what the replacement leader looks like at the start of October and see if that’s still the trend.

Meanwhile, Sri Lanka’s population has risen up because the idiot government Green policies banning the use of fertilizers has predictably resulted in half their crops failing. The PM has resigned, the Presidential Palace has been burned and the President himself was last seen boarding a military ship with suitcases and now the starving protesters have stormed the Central Bank.

The absence of food changes things very quickly.

The mainstream media won’t cover this (unless you know to go looking for it) both because it was WEF/Green New Deal policies that led to the crisis and because one look at what’s going on in Sri Lanka puts the lie to Nancy’s insurrection narrative.

Now throw in the farmers in the Netherlands (and spreading now to Italy and other parts of the EU) protesting the government trying to shut down their farms because they’re producing too much red meat and “nitrogen pollution” (with insiders saying the plan was for the government to then confiscate the farms and set up housing for all the illegals on the land). People around the world are waking up to the anti-human agenda of the idiots in charge.

Our wakeup is probably coming late summer/fall when California and it’s neighbors are go Mad Max once the water in Lake Mead runs out and the regional power grid overloads because the Hoover Dam’s no longer producing power).

No food, no water, no power, no gas.

Are you ready for Thunderdome?
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Visitor Q on July 10, 2022, 12:03:13 PM
Just heard bojo the clown is stepping down. I'm kinda curious about what this means about good old Albion. I suppose I may have a Britt or two in my family tree after all.

Is there a major shift in Britt politics underway? What direction is it going? Who'se likely to be moving into 10 downing?  (God I hope it isn't Carl benjamin...)

Policy wise Boris was actually pretty popular on a range of issues. Certainly Ukraine is not an issue he's been taking a hammering from the general public for.

The real issue is that there is a perception that he doesn't think the rules apply to him, he constantly lies and doesn't have much in the way of integrity.

Culturally this still has a big impact on the British electorate. He had one too many personal scandals so the Tories have ousted him.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 10, 2022, 01:44:38 PM
You really need to expand on this because going on the duck test it look like your a mental conspiracy theorist. The reality is that he lied a lot, which is a Boris thing, until his ministers finally had enough and started resigning. That's a clear nn mental reason.

The reality is he should have resigned over failing to leave the EU, all the completely unnecessary covid shite and deliberately impoverishing everyone with the Net Zero eco-bollocks. Instead, he resigns over one of his MPs getting handsy in a club? Please.

No different to Wanksock resigning over his staged affair, rather than being investigated over what he ordered during the aforementioned covid shite.

We never left the EU? Okay.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 10, 2022, 01:58:59 PM
He's too weak to do the globalists bidding, so they need a new puppet. One who can ram through all the Great Reset bullshit that he failed to.

He will stay on as PM until his party elects a new leader, likely in the autumn.

You really need to expand on this because going on the duck test it look like your a mental conspiracy theorist. The reality is that he lied a lot, which is a Boris thing, until his ministers finally had enough and started resigning. That's a clear nn mental reason.
These days the average conspiracy theory has a life of maybe three months before it’s confirmed as fact. Let’s see what the replacement leader looks like at the start of October and see if that’s still the trend.

YouTube videos don't make your idiot conspiracy theory not an idiot conspiracy theory and Kiero has a particularly idiotic conspiracy theory.

The rest isn't relevant.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Battlemaster on July 10, 2022, 02:29:51 PM
Speaking of bojo and ye olde Albion, how is that whole brexit going? I've heard it hurt the britt economy, scotland was considering leaving GB to remain connected to the EU, had no real positive effect abd may never have gone fully into  effect.

So, Brexit, happening, not happening, half happening, just bad effects, any good effects, what?


Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Visitor Q on July 10, 2022, 02:41:17 PM
Speaking of bojo and ye olde Albion, how is that whole brexit going? I've heard it hurt the britt economy, scotland was considering leaving GB to remain connected to the EU, had no real positive effect abd may never have gone fully into  effect.

So, Brexit, happening, not happening, half happening, just bad effects, any good effects, what?

The problem with analysing the impact of Brexit is that the economic damage caused by COVID was monumental, combined with the large degree of global uncertainty caused by Ukraine Russian conflict. Separating that out from Brexit is difficult.

However overall it has probably added 1.5%-2.5% to inflation. On the other hand it made negotiating COVID vaccines much easier and led to an overall easier COVID experience.

I don't think economically it made much sense to leave but it was never just about raw economics.

As for Scotland, the Scotish National Party is the pro-independant group. There isn't any situation that wouldn't lead to them suggesting a referendum.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: oggsmash on July 10, 2022, 02:46:42 PM
  I always got the feeling some brits in the UK were a little tired of being told what to do by unelected egg head Germans dictating from offices several nations away.   So yeah, not so sure it was all about economics....being a nation is being a nation, not a free economic zone. 
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 10, 2022, 03:03:43 PM
Brexit happened. It's shite but given covid it's hard to say the degree of shite. At least we're free from being the guys with special privileges who get to tell the Germans what to do. Apparently the next step is to withdraw from the ECHR which was created by that German apologist Winston Churchill.

The Scottish independence thing was decided in a vote in 2014 which was a no in part because it would mean Scotland leaving the EU. It was agreed that it would be a once in a generation vote unless there was a material change of circumstances. Two years later there was a referendum to leave the EU in which the Scottish people voted to stay but other parts of the UK voted to leave. Given the previous conversation about Scotland not being in the EU if it left the UK this might be seen as a material change of circumstances.

During all of this Scotland kept voting parties in with nationalist in their name or others like the Greens who had nationalism as part of their agenda. Given this the guys with nationalist in their name have been led to believe that mibbe it  might be time to go for that thing that's in their name again.

It's slightly more complicated than that but that's the gist.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Battlemaster on July 10, 2022, 03:52:01 PM
Speaking of bojo and ye olde Albion, how is that whole brexit going? I've heard it hurt the britt economy, scotland was considering leaving GB to remain connected to the EU, had no real positive effect abd may never have gone fully into  effect.

So, Brexit, happening, not happening, half happening, just bad effects, any good effects, what?

The problem with analysing the impact of Brexit is that the economic damage caused by COVID was monumental, combined with the large degree of global uncertainty caused by Ukraine Russian conflict. Separating that out from Brexit is difficult.

However overall it has probably added 1.5%-2.5% to inflation. On the other hand it made negotiating COVID vaccines much easier and led to an overall easier COVID experience.

I don't think economically it made much sense to leave but it was never just about raw economics.

As for Scotland, the Scotish National Party is the pro-independant group. There isn't any situation that wouldn't lead to them suggesting a referendum.

Thanks for an intelligent, informative reply.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Battlemaster on July 10, 2022, 04:12:04 PM
  I always got the feeling some brits in the UK were a little tired of being told what to do by unelected egg head Germans dictating from offices several nations away.   So yeah, not so sure it was all about economics....being a nation is being a nation, not a free economic zone.

OK, knowing less about the EU  than I do Brexit, so please forbear my ignorance, but I'm under the impression that countries in non eastern Europe are generally democracies. Now I'm trying to understand why democracies would form and join a body that is supposedly so non democratic.

I have heard of the 'Brussels bureaucrats' from many right leaning sources. It just seemed odd to me that democratic nations would create a non democratic agency with great power over them.

Can I request some information on this seeming dichotomy?
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Visitor Q on July 10, 2022, 04:35:20 PM
  I always got the feeling some brits in the UK were a little tired of being told what to do by unelected egg head Germans dictating from offices several nations away.   So yeah, not so sure it was all about economics....being a nation is being a nation, not a free economic zone.



 

OK, knowing less about the EU  than I do Brexit, so please forbear my ignorance, but I'm under the impression that countries in non eastern Europe are generally democracies. Now I'm trying to understand why democracies would form and join a body that is supposedly so non democratic.

I have heard of the 'Brussels bureaucrats' from many right leaning sources. It just seemed odd to me that democratic nations would create a non democratic agency with great power over them.

Can I request some information on this seeming dichotomy?

Basically the EU didn't come into being fully formed but is an extension of several major economic treaties. The big one being the European Economic Community.

As it expanded its power individual countries wrote EU policy into law. Many of these relate to various economic and commercial regulations. There is a feeling that many of the UKs laws and regulations were not written by Parliament.

In addition the European Convention on Human Rights is a separate treaty but for various not unentirely incorrect reasons is often lumped in with the EU more generally. So there is a feeling there is a higher court that people can appeal to beyond an individual country's own courts.

When the UK joined the EU the membership was quite limited, the entry of the Eastern European countries caused a massive surge of migration that had a profound cultural and economic impact in the UK amongst the working class and the outright poor. Because the EU treaty was embedded there was nothing UK politicans could do about this.

As for the wider economic project and why groups would want to form "non-democratic" systems this is a very complicated question but essential boils down to the EU being a neo-liberal German hegomony. Now there are good economic reasons for this and it would probably increase material prosperity but democratic values are not a particular priority for the drivers of this project.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 10, 2022, 05:05:02 PM
Any connection of the EU to the ECHR is entirely incorrect. They're totally different things with totally different origins.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Visitor Q on July 10, 2022, 05:52:05 PM
Any connection of the EU to the ECHR is entirely incorrect. They're totally different things with totally different origins.

As a point of law and fact this is incorrect. Article 6 of the Treaty of Lisbon requires the EU to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights. For the last 10 years negotiations have been proceeding to ensure this goes ahead.

Furthermore every member of the EU is party to the ECHR and new members in practice would need to be willing to be party to it in order to fulfil the Copenhagen Criteria (which incidentally draw on ECHR case law)

The origins of the ECHR comes directly from proponents of European integration in the wake of WW2.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 10, 2022, 06:24:08 PM
Any connection of the EU to the ECHR is entirely incorrect. They're totally different things with totally different origins.

As a point of law and fact this is incorrect. Article 6 of the Treaty of Lisbon requires the EU to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights. For the last 10 years negotiations have been proceeding to ensure this goes ahead.

Furthermore every member of the EU is party to the ECHR and new members in practice would need to be willing to be party to it in order to fulfil the Copenhagen Criteria (which incidentally draw on ECHR case law)

The origins of the ECHR comes directly from proponents of European integration in the wake of WW2.

Nione of which requires a non-member of the EU to sign up to the ECHR which was created with large involvement of the UK which had no plans to join a European treaty at the time. It came from proponents of having human rights protected after one and f the worst destructions of the concept in recent history.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Visitor Q on July 10, 2022, 07:12:02 PM
Any connection of the EU to the ECHR is entirely incorrect. They're totally different things with totally different origins.

As a point of law and fact this is incorrect. Article 6 of the Treaty of Lisbon requires the EU to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights. For the last 10 years negotiations have been proceeding to ensure this goes ahead.

Furthermore every member of the EU is party to the ECHR and new members in practice would need to be willing to be party to it in order to fulfil the Copenhagen Criteria (which incidentally draw on ECHR case law)

The origins of the ECHR comes directly from proponents of European integration in the wake of WW2.

Nione of which requires a non-member of the EU to sign up to the ECHR which was created with large involvement of the UK which had no plans to join a European treaty at the time. It came from proponents of having human rights protected after one and f the worst destructions of the concept in recent history.

This is a separate issue to the claim you made which is that there is no connection to the two institutions. I have demonstrated citing law and EU principles that there is a connection.

Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 10, 2022, 07:22:23 PM
Any connection of the EU to the ECHR is entirely incorrect. They're totally different things with totally different origins.

As a point of law and fact this is incorrect. Article 6 of the Treaty of Lisbon requires the EU to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights. For the last 10 years negotiations have been proceeding to ensure this goes ahead.

Furthermore every member of the EU is party to the ECHR and new members in practice would need to be willing to be party to it in order to fulfil the Copenhagen Criteria (which incidentally draw on ECHR case law)

The origins of the ECHR comes directly from proponents of European integration in the wake of WW2.

Nione of which requires a non-member of the EU to sign up to the ECHR which was created with large involvement of the UK which had no plans to join a European treaty at the time. It came from proponents of having human rights protected after one and f the worst destructions of the concept in recent history.

This is a separate issue to the claim you made which is that there is no connection to the two institutions. I have demonstrated citing law and EU principles that there is a connection.

Good for you.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Shasarak on July 10, 2022, 08:08:57 PM
A Scotsman admitting he was wrong?

It truly is the end of times.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Pat on July 10, 2022, 08:38:06 PM
A Scotsman admitting he was wrong?

It truly is the end of times.
He's clearly no true Scotsman.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Eirikrautha on July 10, 2022, 09:26:59 PM
A Scotsman admitting he was wrong?

It truly is the end of times.
He's clearly no true Scotsman.

Well played.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Battlemaster on July 10, 2022, 09:55:39 PM
  I always got the feeling some brits in the UK were a little tired of being told what to do by unelected egg head Germans dictating from offices several nations away.   So yeah, not so sure it was all about economics....being a nation is being a nation, not a free economic zone.



 

OK, knowing less about the EU  than I do Brexit, so please forbear my ignorance, but I'm under the impression that countries in non eastern Europe are generally democracies. Now I'm trying to understand why democracies would form and join a body that is supposedly so non democratic.

I have heard of the 'Brussels bureaucrats' from many right leaning sources. It just seemed odd to me that democratic nations would create a non democratic agency with great power over them.

Can I request some information on this seeming dichotomy?

Basically the EU didn't come into being fully formed but is an extension of several major economic treaties. The big one being the European Economic Community.

As it expanded its power individual countries wrote EU policy into law. Many of these relate to various economic and commercial regulations. There is a feeling that many of the UKs laws and regulations were not written by Parliament.

In addition the European Convention on Human Rights is a separate treaty but for various not unentirely incorrect reasons is often lumped in with the EU more generally. So there is a feeling there is a higher court that people can appeal to beyond an individual country's own courts.

When the UK joined the EU the membership was quite limited, the entry of the Eastern European countries caused a massive surge of migration that had a profound cultural and economic impact in the UK amongst the working class and the outright poor. Because the EU treaty was embedded there was nothing UK politicans could do about this.

As for the wider economic project and why groups would want to form "non-democratic" systems this is a very complicated question but essential boils down to the EU being a neo-liberal German hegomony. Now there are good economic reasons for this and it would probably increase material prosperity but democratic values are not a particular priority for the drivers of this project.


Mmmmkay, so if britain were not forced to take in more refugees than it wanted, and people could not appeal British law to a court outside England it might have stayed in?
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Visitor Q on July 11, 2022, 04:51:43 AM
  I always got the feeling some brits in the UK were a little tired of being told what to do by unelected egg head Germans dictating from offices several nations away.   So yeah, not so sure it was all about economics....being a nation is being a nation, not a free economic zone.



 

OK, knowing less about the EU  than I do Brexit, so please forbear my ignorance, but I'm under the impression that countries in non eastern Europe are generally democracies. Now I'm trying to understand why democracies would form and join a body that is supposedly so non democratic.

I have heard of the 'Brussels bureaucrats' from many right leaning sources. It just seemed odd to me that democratic nations would create a non democratic agency with great power over them.

Can I request some information on this seeming dichotomy?

Basically the EU didn't come into being fully formed but is an extension of several major economic treaties. The big one being the European Economic Community.

As it expanded its power individual countries wrote EU policy into law. Many of these relate to various economic and commercial regulations. There is a feeling that many of the UKs laws and regulations were not written by Parliament.

In addition the European Convention on Human Rights is a separate treaty but for various not unentirely incorrect reasons is often lumped in with the EU more generally. So there is a feeling there is a higher court that people can appeal to beyond an individual country's own courts.

When the UK joined the EU the membership was quite limited, the entry of the Eastern European countries caused a massive surge of migration that had a profound cultural and economic impact in the UK amongst the working class and the outright poor. Because the EU treaty was embedded there was nothing UK politicans could do about this.

As for the wider economic project and why groups would want to form "non-democratic" systems this is a very complicated question but essential boils down to the EU being a neo-liberal German hegomony. Now there are good economic reasons for this and it would probably increase material prosperity but democratic values are not a particular priority for the drivers of this project.


Mmmmkay, so if britain were not forced to take in more refugees than it wanted, and people could not appeal British law to a court outside England it might have stayed in?

The mass migration from Eastern Europe weren't refugees they were economic migrants. One of the key principles of the EU is free movement of labour. Without free movement of labour the EU would be an entirely different entity. So yes UK would probably still be in the EU but it is sort of a superficial answer because everything would be different across all 27 countries.

Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Kiero on July 11, 2022, 06:55:50 AM
We never left the EU? Okay.

Still paying them, still following their rules. Fuck off, normie, we haven't left.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 11, 2022, 07:56:26 PM
A Scotsman admitting he was wrong?

It truly is the end of times.

How could you of all people not see I was answering in the sarcasm colour?
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 11, 2022, 07:59:26 PM
We never left the EU? Okay.

Still paying them, still following their rules. Fuck off, normie, we haven't left.

Naw we left just not in whatever glaikit way you preferred you absolute nutjob.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Shasarak on July 11, 2022, 08:58:04 PM
A Scotsman admitting he was wrong?

It truly is the end of times.

How could you of all people not see I was answering in the sarcasm colour?

I know sarcasm when I see it.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Battlemaster on July 11, 2022, 11:29:38 PM
OK now,  just everyone freeze for a second.

First people say Brexit is done.

Now people say that Britain is still paying eu fees and following eu rules.

So which is it?
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Visitor Q on July 12, 2022, 03:08:10 AM
OK now,  just everyone freeze for a second.

First people say Brexit is done.

Now people say that Britain is still paying eu fees and following eu rules.

So which is it?

The EU is a very large, very complex economic and political bloc. It put in place hundreds of pieces of regulation. For example minimum standards of cleanliness of water. This means water could be pumped across borders or bottled and sold within the EU without worrying that it was less clean than your domestic supply.

Some countries simply followed these rules directly. Other countries like UK actually voted them into UK law through Parliment.

The consequence of this is that following Brexit the UK still has these standards in place because they are in UK law. Strictly speaking, legally they aren't "their" rules, they are UK rules.

This is added to the fact that in reality the UK either proposed, sponsored or actively supported 95% of the EU regulations that went to a vote anyway so its difficult to separate out what laws and regulations the UK would actually want to get rid of. For example financial regulations within the EU are driven by the Financial Conduct Authority in London.

As for paying the EU essentially there are two areas, cooperative programmes that the UK still engages with and gets the benefit from and a financial settlement based on contributions the UK had agreed to undertake while part of the EU.

Brexit has happened but the reality isn't as straightfoward as just dislocating the economy from EU overnight.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 12, 2022, 03:28:31 PM
A Scotsman admitting he was wrong?

It truly is the end of times.

How could you of all people not see I was answering in the sarcasm colour?

Of course you do.

I know sarcasm when I see it.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Pat on July 12, 2022, 03:32:05 PM
This is added to the fact that in reality the UK either proposed, sponsored or actively supported 95% of the EU regulations that went to a vote anyway so its difficult to separate out what laws and regulations the UK would actually want to get rid of. For example financial regulations within the EU are driven by the Financial Conduct Authority in London.
Finance makes sense, because London is so important. But I'm surprised the UK had that much influence over everything else. I thought Germany and France would be more influential.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Visitor Q on July 12, 2022, 04:56:54 PM
This is added to the fact that in reality the UK either proposed, sponsored or actively supported 95% of the EU regulations that went to a vote anyway so its difficult to separate out what laws and regulations the UK would actually want to get rid of. For example financial regulations within the EU are driven by the Financial Conduct Authority in London.
Finance makes sense, because London is so important. But I'm surprised the UK had that much influence over everything else. I thought Germany and France would be more influential.

It's comparative. Germany, France and UK had the largest economies in the EU  then Italy. Then there's quite a big drop off for the other countries.

Germany definitely has the most influence in EU. Then France and UK were there to balance that influence out or in most cases they worked out what they wanted between the three of them and did that.

But then UK has always been a bit lukewarm about Europe so they probably never quite influenced it to the extent they could have.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Kiero on July 13, 2022, 10:08:59 AM
It's comparative. Germany, France and UK had the largest economies in the EU  then Italy. Then there's quite a big drop off for the other countries.

Germany definitely has the most influence in EU. Then France and UK were there to balance that influence out or in most cases they worked out what they wanted between the three of them and did that.

But then UK has always been a bit lukewarm about Europe so they probably never quite influenced it to the extent they could have.

Germany bankrolls the EU, they are the largest net contributor by far (the UK is second).

The UK is "lukewarm" because we were never actually asked to join, most people have always been opposed to our membership, and the EU has taken the piss milking us for as much money as they could get. That's before you get to the fundamental incompatibility of our common law legal system with the civil law systems that prevail on the Continent.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: King Tyranno on July 15, 2022, 06:48:31 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D4cJ2EZX4AAkZ0z?format=jpg&name=small)

Always nice to see Commander Riker helping UKIP out.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Kiero on July 19, 2022, 10:33:07 AM
Just in case you're wondering who owns all three candidates still in the running to be PM:

(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/20dda65a430f811a3083451624c2d9611a1cc5e45c55507c03955214b4e5b80d.jpg?w=600&h=372)
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 19, 2022, 12:00:42 PM
Just in case you're wondering who owns all three candidates still in the running to be PM:

(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/20dda65a430f811a3083451624c2d9611a1cc5e45c55507c03955214b4e5b80d.jpg?w=600&h=372)

They're coming to get you Kiero! It's okay you can defend yourself through the ECHR, oh.

I despise all of them but I'm loath to think an organised conspiracy would be this fucking inept. If it is then your safe. The whole idea of presenting the Tory internal civil war over the last decade as some over-arching conspiracy is unbelievablly idiotic.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: GeekyBugle on July 19, 2022, 12:32:11 PM
Just in case you're wondering who owns all three candidates still in the running to be PM:

(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/20dda65a430f811a3083451624c2d9611a1cc5e45c55507c03955214b4e5b80d.jpg?w=600&h=372)

So Kemi is out? Had to be, they got rid of the only one that looked like was going to do something for the UK people.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Kiero on July 19, 2022, 05:24:18 PM
They're coming to get you Kiero! It's okay you can defend yourself through the ECHR, oh.

I despise all of them but I'm loath to think an organised conspiracy would be this fucking inept. If it is then your safe. The whole idea of presenting the Tory internal civil war over the last decade as some over-arching conspiracy is unbelievablly idiotic.

Fuck off, normie, you haven't got a clue. They're nothing but puppets, and the incompetence is by design.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 19, 2022, 05:36:22 PM
They're coming to get you Kiero! It's okay you can defend yourself through the ECHR, oh.

I despise all of them but I'm loath to think an organised conspiracy would be this fucking inept. If it is then your safe. The whole idea of presenting the Tory internal civil war over the last decade as some over-arching conspiracy is unbelievablly idiotic.

Fuck off, normie, you haven't got a clue. They're nothing but puppets, and the incompetence is by design.

Is "normie" your new thing? What does it mean other than that I'm normal and you're not? I'm okay with you being abnormal, it gives me hope.

Once again Mr Mulder explain this massive conspiracy that's currently fucking up the Conservative party by design. Give me a point by point breakdown, fuck mate I'll take a PowerPoint presentation at this point. Give me a clue.

The problem is that you have no clue do you? It makes you feel special to think you do and that other people are just "normie" but really you're just a mental.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Timothe on July 19, 2022, 09:01:41 PM
Rule Britannia!
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Shasarak on July 19, 2022, 10:06:36 PM
Just in case you're wondering who owns all three candidates still in the running to be PM:

(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/20dda65a430f811a3083451624c2d9611a1cc5e45c55507c03955214b4e5b80d.jpg?w=600&h=372)

I'll put 10 internetbucks on the rich Indian guy.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Visitor Q on July 20, 2022, 04:52:25 AM
I'd be pretty amazed if it doesn't end up being Mr Sunak.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Eirikrautha on July 20, 2022, 08:09:01 AM
Rule Britannia!
How do you say that in Hindi?
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Timothe on July 20, 2022, 04:01:38 PM
Rule Britannia!
How do you say that in Hindi?

I was only pointing out that the PM they’re sacking was singing that on the news when they pulled out of the EU.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Kiero on July 21, 2022, 03:23:51 PM
Is "normie" your new thing? What does it mean other than that I'm normal and you're not? I'm okay with you being abnormal, it gives me hope.

Once again Mr Mulder explain this massive conspiracy that's currently fucking up the Conservative party by design. Give me a point by point breakdown, fuck mate I'll take a PowerPoint presentation at this point. Give me a clue.

The problem is that you have no clue do you? It makes you feel special to think you do and that other people are just "normie" but really you're just a mental.

You're a moron of the highest order, Garry boy. All the WEF shite is right in front of your fucking nose, and all you've got is calling me mental.

Do fuck off, and remember this exchange when you're living in a pod eating bugs, having had all your property confiscated to pay off their debts.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: HappyDaze on July 21, 2022, 03:48:56 PM
Is "normie" your new thing? What does it mean other than that I'm normal and you're not? I'm okay with you being abnormal, it gives me hope.

Once again Mr Mulder explain this massive conspiracy that's currently fucking up the Conservative party by design. Give me a point by point breakdown, fuck mate I'll take a PowerPoint presentation at this point. Give me a clue.

The problem is that you have no clue do you? It makes you feel special to think you do and that other people are just "normie" but really you're just a mental.

You're a moron of the highest order, Garry boy. All the WEF shite is right in front of your fucking nose, and all you've got is calling me mental.

Do fuck off, and remember this exchange when you're living in a pod eating bugs, having had all your property confiscated to pay off their debts.
It's OK, Kiero, we're laughing with you not at you.

I joke. We really are laughing at you.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Visitor Q on July 21, 2022, 04:18:21 PM
I'd be pretty amazed if it doesn't end up being Mr Sunak.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/liz-truss-rishi-sunak-tory-leadership-poll-b2128498.html

Looks like I could well end up being amazed if the current polling is anything to go by.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 21, 2022, 05:13:55 PM
Is "normie" your new thing? What does it mean other than that I'm normal and you're not? I'm okay with you being abnormal, it gives me hope.

Once again Mr Mulder explain this massive conspiracy that's currently fucking up the Conservative party by design. Give me a point by point breakdown, fuck mate I'll take a PowerPoint presentation at this point. Give me a clue.

The problem is that you have no clue do you? It makes you feel special to think you do and that other people are just "normie" but really you're just a mental.

You're a moron of the highest order, Garry boy. All the WEF shite is right in front of your fucking nose, and all you've got is calling me mental.

Do fuck off, and remember this exchange when you're living in a pod eating bugs, having had all your property confiscated to pay off their debts.

Telling you that you're a mental is all that's really left. I mean if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it probably tastes really good roasted with a nice plum sauce and you my friend are quackers. I don't think you're a moron, I really hold you in higher regard than that, but I do believe that you've convinced yourself that you're smarter than other people, superior to them and have some sort of great insight into how everything really works. You're really just being sucked into someone else's rather dull delusion.

Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: SHARK on July 21, 2022, 10:05:11 PM
Greetings!

It is my understanding that some high-up bureaucrat in the UN explained that according to future UN planning, people will be eating bugs--or insect patties, whatever.

You will own nothing and be happy!

Fuck the UN globalist cunts.

They all need to bathe in fucking napalm.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 23, 2022, 02:33:28 PM
It was a report by the UN that eating bugs for protein may help against world hunger which points out the 2 billion already do this. It's not anything involving coercion it's simply talking about diversing food supply for areas with lack of food security.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Kiero on July 24, 2022, 09:14:09 AM
Telling you that you're a mental is all that's really left. I mean if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it probably tastes really good roasted with a nice plum sauce and you my friend are quackers. I don't think you're a moron, I really hold you in higher regard than that, but I do believe that you've convinced yourself that you're smarter than other people, superior to them and have some sort of great insight into how everything really works. You're really just being sucked into someone else's rather dull delusion.

You're a guillible mong who thinks because he consumes the shite coming out of the BBC and the Guardian, that you're "well informed". Your last post shows just how dim you are, thinking push for insect protein is going to remain voluntary.

Clearly missed the way farmland is being appropriated and the deliberate sabotage of food processing. Your blithe referencing of "food security" shows how ignorant you are of what's going on.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 24, 2022, 10:33:31 AM
Telling you that you're a mental is all that's really left. I mean if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it probably tastes really good roasted with a nice plum sauce and you my friend are quackers. I don't think you're a moron, I really hold you in higher regard than that, but I do believe that you've convinced yourself that you're smarter than other people, superior to them and have some sort of great insight into how everything really works. You're really just being sucked into someone else's rather dull delusion.


You're a guillible mong who thinks because he consumes the shite coming out of the BBC and the Guardian, that you're "well informed". Your last post shows just how dim you are, thinking push for insect protein is going to remain voluntary.

Clearly missed the way farmland is being appropriated and the deliberate sabotage of food processing. Your blithe referencing of "food security" shows how ignorant you are of what's going on.

Given your well sourced opinions about Bojos demise I unfortunately have to decline following you down the rabbit hole of whatever conspiracy sites support your mental decline. I'll just have to remain normal and let you be the bravely divergent gadje that you are.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Kiero on July 24, 2022, 10:42:22 AM
Given your well sourced opinions about Bojos demise I unfortunately have to decline following you down the rabbit hole of whatever conspiracy sites support your mental decline. I'll just have to remain normal and let you be the bravely divergent gadje that you are.

Please go fuck yourself, you dumb normie cunt. It's precisely because of people like you that we're being walked all over by globalist shitbags.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 24, 2022, 10:47:01 AM
Given your well sourced opinions about Bojos demise I unfortunately have to decline following you down the rabbit hole of whatever conspiracy sites support your mental decline. I'll just have to remain normal and let you be the bravely divergent gadje that you are.

Please go fuck yourself, you dumb normie cunt. It's precisely because of people like you that we're being walked all over by globalist shitbags.

I'm sure you're deep in the fight against the conspiracy. Probably heading a cell of brave insurgents working hard to undermine The Man and bring a stop to their evil schemes.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Kiero on July 28, 2022, 11:04:00 AM
Head of OFCOM is a WEFer, but nothing to see here NPCs:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FYwnCFgUcAADE2j?format=jpg&name=medium

For non-Brits, OFCOM is the press and broadcast regulator, they control what we're allowed to see and hear in print, on the airwaves and on the internet.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 28, 2022, 02:04:39 PM
Head of OFCOM is a WEFer, but nothing to see here NPCs:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FYwnCFgUcAADE2j?format=jpg&name=medium

For non-Brits, OFCOM is the press and broadcast regulator, they control what we're allowed to see and hear in print, on the airwaves and on the internet.

If only this declared publicly instead of being secretive! Oh.

I like the NPC thing, it's cute. I suppose this makes you a PC who is doing stuff to influence things against all these super secret squirrel people. What you doing from your Conspiracy X like base? In the end as an NPC I really feel you're letting us down if you're not actually out there fight the good fight.

A public organisation with a public agenda is not an evil conspiracy. It can be a collection of awful dicks who are currently trying to take away workers rights, the Conservative Party, but as long as long as they're being upfront about it we don't have to dive into madness.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: GeekyBugle on July 28, 2022, 04:01:51 PM
Head of OFCOM is a WEFer, but nothing to see here NPCs:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FYwnCFgUcAADE2j?format=jpg&name=medium

For non-Brits, OFCOM is the press and broadcast regulator, they control what we're allowed to see and hear in print, on the airwaves and on the internet.

If only this declared publicly instead of being secretive! Oh.

I like the NPC thing, it's cute. I suppose this makes you a PC who is doing stuff to influence things against all these super secret squirrel people. What you doing from your Conspiracy X like base? In the end as an NPC I really feel you're letting us down if you're not actually out there fight the good fight.

A public organisation with a public agenda is not an evil conspiracy. It can be a collection of awful dicks who are currently trying to take away workers rights, the Conservative Party, but as long as long as they're being upfront about it we don't have to dive into madness.

LOL, are you really this dumb?

It's not a SECRET conspiracy, but it is a conspiracy, since they ARE conspiring to get the outcomes they want to get:

You vill eat ze bugs, you vill live in the pod, you vill stink like a skunk and you vill ve happy.

If you're really this retarded I wonder if you can dress yourself.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on July 28, 2022, 04:17:50 PM
Head of OFCOM is a WEFer, but nothing to see here NPCs:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FYwnCFgUcAADE2j?format=jpg&name=medium

For non-Brits, OFCOM is the press and broadcast regulator, they control what we're allowed to see and hear in print, on the airwaves and on the internet.

If only this declared publicly instead of being secretive! Oh.

I like the NPC thing, it's cute. I suppose this makes you a PC who is doing stuff to influence things against all these super secret squirrel people. What you doing from your Conspiracy X like base? In the end as an NPC I really feel you're letting us down if you're not actually out there fight the good fight.

A public organisation with a public agenda is not an evil conspiracy. It can be a collection of awful dicks who are currently trying to take away workers rights, the Conservative Party, but as long as long as they're being upfront about it we don't have to dive into madness.

LOL, are you really this dumb?

It's not a SECRET conspiracy, but it is a conspiracy, since they ARE conspiring to get the outcomes they want to get:

You vill eat ze bugs, you vill live in the pod, you vill stink like a skunk and you vill ve happy.

If you're really this retarded I wonder if you can dress yourself.

So it's exactly like any political party or movement? If not what makes it different and why are you so feart?
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Kiero on August 01, 2022, 07:08:37 PM
So it's exactly like any political party or movement? If not what makes it different and why are you so feart?

No one ever elected them and they cannot be removed, you dumb fuck.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Visitor Q on August 01, 2022, 08:45:41 PM
So it's exactly like any political party or movement? If not what makes it different and why are you so feart?

No one ever elected them and they cannot be removed, you dumb fuck.

In your ideal scenario you'd want statutory regulators and Ombudsmen to be elected?
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Chris24601 on August 02, 2022, 09:42:46 AM
So it's exactly like any political party or movement? If not what makes it different and why are you so feart?

No one ever elected them and they cannot be removed, you dumb fuck.

In your ideal scenario you'd want statutory regulators and Ombudsmen to be elected?
In my ideal scenario I’d want statutory regulators (aka petty tyrants who pass mini-laws via creative reading of actual laws) shot out of a cannon into a lake of burning napalm and ombudsman appointed by random number generator from a municipal phone book.

Neither of these would result in a system worse than what we have now and would probably be an improvement.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Visitor Q on August 02, 2022, 01:35:26 PM
So it's exactly like any political party or movement? If not what makes it different and why are you so feart?

No one ever elected them and they cannot be removed, you dumb fuck.

In your ideal scenario you'd want statutory regulators and Ombudsmen to be elected?
In my ideal scenario I’d want statutory regulators (aka petty tyrants who pass mini-laws via creative reading of actual laws) shot out of a cannon into a lake of burning napalm and ombudsman appointed by random number generator from a municipal phone book.

Neither of these would result in a system worse than what we have now and would probably be an improvement.

Ah, sorry I thought we were having a serious discussion. My mistake. Love the imagery though, very droll.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Chris24601 on August 03, 2022, 08:11:44 AM
So it's exactly like any political party or movement? If not what makes it different and why are you so feart?

No one ever elected them and they cannot be removed, you dumb fuck.

In your ideal scenario you'd want statutory regulators and Ombudsmen to be elected?
In my ideal scenario I’d want statutory regulators (aka petty tyrants who pass mini-laws via creative reading of actual laws) shot out of a cannon into a lake of burning napalm and ombudsman appointed by random number generator from a municipal phone book.

Neither of these would result in a system worse than what we have now and would probably be an improvement.

Ah, sorry I thought we were having a serious discussion. My mistake. Love the imagery though, very droll.
Who says I’m not serious?

Western governments are massively bloated with parasites who feed off the taxes of the working class while producing nothing of value; just useless regulations like setting the level of humidity you can have your air conditioner remove from the air in the name of protecting the environment or requiring county residents with more than adequate septic systems to hook into the city sewer lines because they’ve decided it’s better for the environment (and their budget because $120/month per household adds up).

Oh, and when you hook up to the sewer line you’re being forced to take… the fine print states that by taking this city service you didn’t want or need, you also waive all rights to oppose your annexation by the city.

So, because some unelected bureaucrats decided they wanted to pad their budgets and paychecks, they declared by fiat that we must take a service we didn’t need or want costing us $1500 a year extra (per each of the couple thousand homes added) and then annexed us so now we have to pay all the city taxes while cutting the funding to the county schools and giving us crappier fire and police service… and then they hold community meetings where the assclowns get up and tell us we should be grateful to them for forces us to pay thousands a year more for crappier service while they’ve gotten pay raises for increasing the city’s coffers.

No… fuck them all. Fire 100% of them and replace them with volunteer positions. Society would be better off if these greedy no talent hacks had to get jobs in the real world to support themselves (where they’d actually be underqualified to be a Walmart stock boy… you actually have to show up on time and do actual work; two things they’ve never done before) so they’d have some understanding of the economic hardships they’re putting people through while patting themselves on the back for their do-gooderism.

And as for Ombudsmen… I am also dead serious. As every “independent council” investigation of the past three decades has shown, government appointed investigators aren’t there to protect the interests of the people… they’re there to protect the government from scrutiny while presenting the illusion that something is being done. At least a random group pulled from the phone book has a chance of actually wanting to advance the people’s interests.

Once upon a time our grade schoolers could pass tests that the majority of today’s college grads would flunk on a budget that, even adjusted for inflation, was a pittance. The problem isn’t that we aren’t spending enough, it’s that the entire institution is no longer focused on teaching children what they actually need, but on padding the paychecks of a bloated unelected middle and upper management and shielding teachers from any accountability for their gross negligence.

That’s your professional bureaucratic class that you seem to think holds some type of value… we’d be better off being ruled by vampires; at they’re honest about wanting to suck you dry and won’t gaslight you that it’s for your own good while they’re doing it.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on August 03, 2022, 07:41:32 PM
To be fair the alternative is actually being ruled by corporate vampires so I'll stick with appointed civil servants.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Eirikrautha on August 04, 2022, 12:26:57 AM
To be fair the alternative is actually being ruled by corporate vampires so I'll stick with appointed civil servants.

That's why you are a fool.  Corporations produce something of value (and if you don't value their products, then they have no power over you), and the purchase of their products are voluntary.  The government is not voluntary, and will use force to make you obey.  While both are terrible overlords, only a fool will pick the evil that enforces it's will via compulsion backed by the threat of violence.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 04, 2022, 09:34:49 AM
To be fair the alternative is actually being ruled by corporate vampires so I'll stick with appointed civil servants.
Possibly the silliest take in this thread. Bravo.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on August 04, 2022, 10:00:27 AM
To be fair the alternative is actually being ruled by corporate vampires so I'll stick with appointed civil servants.
Possibly the silliest take in this thread. Bravo.

I'm a believer in a mixed economy so a degree of governmental oversight from appointed professionals makes sense to me. I'm sure I'd find your perspective just as silly.

Not as silly as the idea that Johnson was forced to resign because he failed to implement a world wide economic reset for a shadowy cabal that advertises themselves but there you go.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 04, 2022, 06:46:36 PM
To be fair the alternative is actually being ruled by corporate vampires so I'll stick with appointed civil servants.
Possibly the silliest take in this thread. Bravo.

I'm a believer in a mixed economy so a degree of governmental oversight from appointed professionals makes sense to me. I'm sure I'd find your perspective just as silly.

Not as silly as the idea that Johnson was forced to resign because he failed to implement a world wide economic reset for a shadowy cabal that advertises themselves but there you go.

The only one claiming it's a "shadowy/secret" cabal is you. We know who they are, what they want and the lenghts they are willing to go to get there (genocide/democide). We have even named them : The WEF.
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Garry G on August 05, 2022, 12:19:29 PM
To be fair the alternative is actually being ruled by corporate vampires so I'll stick with appointed civil servants.
Possibly the silliest take in this thread. Bravo.

I'm a believer in a mixed economy so a degree of governmental oversight from appointed professionals makes sense to me. I'm sure I'd find your perspective just as silly.

Not as silly as the idea that Johnson was forced to resign because he failed to implement a world wide economic reset for a shadowy cabal that advertises themselves but there you go.

The only one claiming it's a "shadowy/secret" cabal is you. We know who they are, what they want and the lenghts they are willing to go to get there (genocide/democide). We have even named them : The WEF.

And they're able to make a head of state resign through their totally transparent machinations?
Title: Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
Post by: Kiero on November 02, 2022, 08:04:11 AM
Just in case you haven't been following British politics the last few months, it's like this:

(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/528696bb70474481121c65c11cceef70b06946339e5e88838e1f73f842846fee.png)