I live in England, the country.. Britain is just an Island, a land mass, nothing more... <COMMENT EDITED>
Interesting use of the word 'everyone'. Certainly not the mother of the free when the British isles grew rich on the proceeds of the slave trade.
Itself the European Union and its commission is not a nation therfore breaking any of their rules or laws is NOT a breach of International Law.. Its a breach of EU Law for which they have the ECJ to deal with EU Law issues... But UK is not an EU member anymore so they cannot do anything even if they take us to the ECJ.. The ECJ can make a ruling against the UK but cannot enforce it... The ammendment to the Withdrawal Agreement are not a breach of any laws as per section 38 of the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020 which lets the UK amend the bill to maintain our sovereignty.. Both EU and UK signed this agreement...I dont know how much more simplier I can put it for you..
Maybe it isn't me you should be putting your theory to but Brandon Lewis. I think the argument is around the notion of maintaining sovereignty.
Here its straight from a Lawyers mouth... Johnson's Brexit bill WON'T break law - lawyer silences critics with THREE simple points Mr Howe said section 38 of the Withdrawal Agreement “preserves Parliamentary sovereignty” and “makes it quite clear that Parliament has the right to pass the clauses which the government is proposing and thereby override these errant clauses in the Protocol”. https://www.express.co.uk/news/poli...on-uk-internal-market-bill-brexit-latest-news
What major country did not colonize? What major nation do YOU support? If the Romans did not have an empire, what empire would have enslaved the Romans? Do you think Russia and China today have empires?
Lawyers frequently argue with each other as to who is right. What you have quoted is an opinion, which lines up alongside the statement in the House of Commons by Brandon Lewis.
And was practically the first country to not only ban it but actively seek to stop the trade via the Royal Navy's West Africa Squadron. One of the reasons for the US WofI was the Somerset declaration which freed any American slaves who arrived in the UK.
A treaty is between two nations, breaching a treaty breaks international law... The EU is NOT a nation hence why the Withdrawal Agreement is called an Agreement not a treaty... No international laws have been broken!...
The gov has already said, multiple times it does NOT break any international laws concerning the Withdrawal Agreement... Its the Good Friday agreement which is a treaty between two nations (UK and IRE) that they are worried about, that something in their bill might breach international law you imbecile... For the last time, The EU is NOT a nation and the Withdrawal Agreement is NOT a treatry so nothing to do with intenational law!..
Tell Brandon Lewis. Calling me an imbecile is inappropriate in this instance because I have not called the EU a nation, something which seems to be obsessing you.
Belgian congo was rather more than controversial, it was bordering genocide let alone a brutal colony. guess the holocaust was controversial too huh.. controversial dictates that the event can be argued from both sides. there was absolutely no honourable reason why Leopold colonized the Congo other than to line his own pockets.
Wha... Egypt for starters had a great empire under the Pharaohs. In fact a series of empires. Ethiopia under the Aksumites also founded a great empire. King Keita founded the Mali empire. Every nation of significance founded empires. Saying one nation is bad for having an empire is silly, ignorant even.
Not exactly countries with great human rights records? All of who fought wars with their neighbours over territory,
It was appalling, even other colonial powers thought so which was why it became an official Belgian colony following the outcry. But you look at how it is today it's not much different after independence?
it was in reference to Great countries that never colonized so this would pertain to the Empires of Egypt, Ethiopia etc of antiquity. if you can provide information of their human rights violations in the times of their pomp (over 1000 years ago) then please do..
Nobody mentioned empires, we specifically are discussing colonizers, of which non of the above were. Europeans were brutal colonizers though.
it was underdeveloped by europeans who built an infrastructure to enable export of materials directly out of africa. this had zero benefit to the people of africa since the colonies were governed by the municipalities in europe, where all the profit went. A railroad was built between 1896 and 1901 to connect landlocked, and relatively prosperous Uganda to the coast (i.e. Mombasa). Kenya was merely transit territory. We verified that this railroad indeed followed the route that minimised construction costs. Using engineering reports, we fed into the computer geographic information and historical cost parameters associated with earth formation, clearing, permanent way, and sidings and culverts. We also noted that the best locomotives at that time could only overcome gradients below 5-10%. The overlap of the cheapest-to-construct route, as identified by the computer, and the actual line is striking. Tellingly, contemporary critics called the Kenya-Uganda railroad the ‘Lunatic Express’, ‘going from nowhere to utterly nowhere’. In fact, the railroad bypassed highly populated areas en route to Kisumu (Lake Victoria) and Uganda. Hence, locations on or near the route were lucky to have received access to the railroad, but others, with similar or better geography missed out.
