By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Some in the thread seem unclear about the legal status of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents as law enforcement officers. They are certainly considered to be the latter, but their powers of investigation, detention and arrest are limited to immigration and customs offences. However, this includes authority to execute warrants of arrest for non-immigration violations under section 287(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act in order to effectively accomplish their individual missions. As with the police, there are limits on their powers. For example, suspects can remain silent while awaiting legal representation and a court warrant is required to enter private premises, These powers come from s287 of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The officers are under the control of the Department of Homeland Security. Their powers predate Trump's time in office.
As far as I can see you were wrong about almost everything as per usual. I've seen several frame by frame videos, and posted the two that support the points I made. People can see for themselves. The city is heavily politicized not least because of the state and city administrations' unwillingness to get to grips with the Somali fraud scandal. I posted a video about that on another thread a week or two ago, and that contains an excellent example of the lunacy of a female anti-ICE demonstrator (17.10 onwards).
One thing that strikes me about this is that had the shots not been fired it would have been very clear who was at fault and Mrs Good would be facing charges. Firing those shots was not a wise thing to do, although one might think there was provocation leading to a bad split second decision.
Several videos have come to light that in my opinion contradict elements of the anti-ICE narrative. One early claim was that Mrs Good was simply in that location by chance after dropping off her child at school, was executing a three-point turn and would have driven home had she not been victimised by ICE agents. A video that gives a better insight into this shows the four minutes before the shooting occurred. The SUV stops a few yards up the road while an unidentified person gets out. It then moves on to stop at 90 degrees to the flow of traffic and is there for well over a minute before the ICE agents arrive. A 2nd video from the ICE shooter’s bodycam fills in a gap by showing us that the unidentified person leaving the SUV was Mrs Good’s wife, who got out so she could film the scene on her phone. From what she says on the bodycam video about the registration plate etc., the couple planned to observe ICE activities for much of the day. One intriguing point about that video is that the wife touches the passenger-side door handle as though to get in just before the car suddenly accelerates. I wondered if this suggested anger or panic on the part of Mrs Good, but some reports say the wife shouted “Drive baby, drive” (which I could not hear on the film). That video shows the speed of the acceleration and strongly suggests that the SUV did strike the ICE shooter.
Another video filmed from front left of the vehicle clearly confirms there was a glancing blow and that there was sudden harsh acceleration.
My take on this is that the shooting was unnecessary and dangerous to other personnel behind the SUV, but that Mrs Good put herself at high risk by ignoring instructions from federal agents and hitting one as she tried to escape the scene.
Edited so that correct video appear in first link.
My son graduated with an M.Eng. this year and got a job in Swansea pretty quickly. Moreover, he has had invitations to be interviewed for graduate engineering positions since then. But what strikes him is that the salaries on offer are not that good - from about £26K to £30K for 40 hours, and not a vast amount ahead of a minimum wage job.
I'm not that keen on X, but do post occasionally. As far as my feed goes, the generality of posts are not as anti-woke as they might be, with a plethora of "rejoining the EU", pro-Starmer, and pro-SNP posts, but I would not support banning the platform.
What strikes me is that censorship of fake body images may become more difficult as AI evolves into AGI. The difference is that artificial general intelligence is not optimised on a specific domain, but is trained on a full range of expert knowledge, and will be capable via machine learning to move beyond the training data set to surpass the sum of human knowledge. Perhaps those better versed in information technology than I am can tell us if it would be possible to corral an AGI large-language-model so that it would not synthesize such images?
DoB 29-10-89 - so age 36. I wondered whether he would still have the pace to operate at full back. He might be better as a centre back, a position he also played in.
I'd probably agree overall and in the long run, but if we take the last two games I'd say Galbraith's form has dipped while our keeper's performances have been top drawer. I had Galbraith on 6 and 7 while I rated Vig at 8 and 9. The Millwall commentary team gave him a 10. I think Galbraith will do better in midfield.
I couldn't help connecting the police cave-in to certain Birmingham pressure groups to the city's 2nd place in a recent ranking of Europe's most dangerous cities.
I'm just trying to give a straightforward answer to your question (which national policies was the UK forced to change as a result of EU membership?). Factortame and the disapplication of the Merchant Shipping Act 1988 was the big case where the primacy of EU law over UK domestic law was established. However, there were other examples involving equal treatment in social security (Pickstone v Freemans PLC), workers' rights (e.g. Barber v Guardian Royal Exchange and Defrenne v SABENA), and motor insurance requirements (e.g., Delaney v Pickett). These forced the UK to amend legislation like the Equal Pay Act 1970, and various social security and pension regulations as well as the UK Motor Insurers' Bureau insurance rules, to comply with EU principles like free movement and non-discrimination. You may say some of these changes were positive rather than negative, and all I am pointing out is that there are quite a few policy areas where we were pushed in a different direction by membership
I'm not sure how this bunch arrived in the UK, but most seem to be lined up for deportation. Unfortunately, I suspect that some individuals have already moved big money out of the country and will have that waiting for them.
Incidentally, there is a recent US story about a huge Somali community fraud in Minnesota, and an eye-opening Youtube video.
I thought the point of contention was whether EU law had ever over-ruled UK domestic law to the UK's disadvantage. The result of the ECJ judgement was that more large foreign owned boats were able to fish in the UK sector and that British-owned boats lost out, as our government realised would happen when they contested the case. So it was a case of lose rather than win, and the UK fishing industry shrank as a result of EU membership. The fisheries deal we agreed to in order to get out of the EU is a different issue.
"Which national policies did the EU stop from enacting in the approaching 50 years of membership?"
Fisheries policy is one example, as illustrated by the case of R (Factortame Ltd) v Secretary of State for Transport, which highlighted the primacy of EU law over national law. The European Court of Justice ruled that the Merchant Shipping Act 1988 was contrary to Community law, which then allowed Spanish companies to sue the UK government for compensation in relation to fishing quotas and nationality of ownership of vessels. As the Act was found to be incompatible with EU law, new UK legislation (and policy) had to be introduced.
Under the cosh for most of the half, and offering very little going forward. The long balls to Ronald are not working because he lacks the pace to get past their full back. The commentator said we were weak on the left flank, but I would say Millwall have been cutting through too easily on both wings. They are winning almost all the 50-50s in midfield as well. Is our team exhausted after the holiday fixtures? Or are we just seeing the limitations of squad quality? The exception is Vig who has worked wonders.
This is like a return to 19th and early 20th century "great power" politics. The post-WW2 creation of the various UN institutions and the attempt to create an international rule-based order looks very shaky.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
