web analytics

ACTE 11

By Pete Moore On January 26th, 2019

For the eleventh week running France has been on fire. And I mean France, not Paris. Every corner of the country appears to be in protest at Macron. The British press used to at least mention the yellow vests in passing. Now it doesn’t bother to mention the protests at all. It’s as if they’d rather people didn’t know.

Check out this remarkable thread for footage from across the country today. Open it up and keep scrolling –

51 Responses to “ACTE 11”

  1. F the French

  2. Yep the same old crap about the BBC conspiracy to hide the news. Old news same lies.

  3. The French are always whining about something

    They want their generous welfare state but they want somebody else to pay for it

    I don’t know for the life of me why any French person or foreigner would want to do business in France if they had a choice of operating elsewhere

  4. These yellow vests might want to be careful..

    Article 6 of the Lisbon treaty (footnote) allows for the death penalty, for War, Riots and upheaval.

    https://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/3169

  5. Professor Schachtschneider pointed out that it [the European Union reform treaty, a.k.a. the Lisbon Treaty] also reintroduces the death penalty in Europe, which I think is very important, in light of the fact that, especially Italy was trying to abandon the death penalty through the United Nations, forever. And this is not in the treaty, but in a footnote, because with the European Union reform treaty, we accept also the European Union Charter, which says that there is no death penalty, and then it has a footnote, which says, “except in the case of war, riots, upheaval” – then the death penalty is possible. Schachtschneider points to the fact that this is an outrage, because they put it in a footnote of a footnote, and you have to read it, like really like a super-expert to find out!

  6. They reinstate the Guillotine ?

    If you’re gonna do it, do it right.

  7. Off with their vests ! 😉

  8. The problem with the Lisbon Treaty, apart from the obvious fact it cones out of Brussels.

    Those who signed it, didn’t bother to actually read it?

    I read somewhere, apparently the Lisbon Treaty is the largest document ever written, so just exactly who knows what other little gems we don’t yet know about?

  9. I thought the Lisbon Treaty came out of Lisbon, you know the city in Portugal, not Brussels.

    The clue’s in the name. 😉

  10. Colm

    The best thing to come from Portugal, is there much celebrated, and radical solution to drugs.

  11. Colm

    You think the Lisbon Treaty had nothing to with Brussels?

    You are joking…right?

  12. “Professor Schachtschneider pointed out that it [the European Union reform treaty, a.k.a. the Lisbon Treaty] also reintroduces the death penalty in Europe, which I think is very important, in light of the fact that, especially Italy was trying to abandon the death penalty through the United Nations, forever. And this is not in the treaty, but in a footnote, because with the European Union reform treaty, we accept also the European Union Charter, which says that there is no death penalty, and then it has a footnote, which says, “except in the case of war, riots, upheaval” – then the death penalty is possible. Schachtschneider points to the fact that this is an outrage, because they put it in a footnote of a footnote, and you have to read it, like really like a super-expert to find out!”

    Not actually true. Article 6 of the Lisbon Treaty incorporates the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights into the body of EU law. The EU Charter itself incorporates the European Convention on Human Rights. Article 2 of the ECHR says:

    Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided by law”.

    Deprivation of life shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention of this Article when it results from the use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary:
    (a) in defence of any person from unlawful violence;
    (b) in order to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained;
    (c) in action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection.

    So it does not introduce the death penalty for rioting. It says however the if the police, in responding to a riot, kill someone using proportional violence then that would not be a violation of the right to life.

  13. So it does not introduce the death penalty for rioting. It says however the if the police, in responding to a riot, kill someone using proportional violence then that would not be a violation of the right to life.

    Footnote..

    Dissent will not be tolerated.

    Peace in Europe my arse.

  14. Nothing to do with dissent. It means if people are engaging in criminal behaviour and the police respond proportionally then the ECHR doesn’t protect the lives of those involved.

    It was actually originally introduced to shield the SAS from prosecution following Gibraltar.

  15. Magnificent, Seamus.

    This wanton ignorance (or is it just lies) masquerading as concern for citizens needs to be challenged.

  16. Seamus.

    Thanks for the Wiki information.

    But all the same.

    I will go with the professor.

    MR.

    Stop being so wilfully ignorant.

    You might “need” some Emporer at Brussels.

    But some of us don’t.

    Just how weak minded are you really?

  17. “Thanks for the Wiki information.”

    If you can find that information on wiki you are welcome to try.

    “But all the same.

    I will go with the professor.”

    Of course you will. Because, despite him being factually incorrect, he reaffirms your bigotry and your bias. I wouldn’t expect anything less from an ignoramus like yourself.

  18. Harri

    How about you do what you praised Phantom for doing and admit you are mistaken on this. The Lisbon Treaty does not in any way legalise the death penalty. It doesn’t even have the authority to do so.

  19. This wanton ignorance (or is it just lies)

    I dunno, was it on the side of a bus?

    No remainer lies, absolutely none.

    Everything they said has come true?

    Correct?

    Wilful ignorance indeed.

    You old globalist you.

  20. Colm, on January 26th, 2019 at 8:28 PM Said:
    Harri

    How about you do what you praised Phantom for doing and admit you are mistaken on this. The Lisbon Treaty does not in any way legalise the death penalty. It doesn’t even have the authority to do so.

    Yes it does.

  21. “Yes it does.”

    Ok. Where? Where in the Lisbon Treaty does it require the introduction of the death penalty. Article and clause please.

  22. Harri,

    We know you can’t think for yourself but surely you can read for yourself?

    The esteemed professor has let his anti-EU hysteria affect his judgment. The text does not reflect what he says.

  23. I know, I know..

    There will be no death penalty.

    And there will be no EU army.

    Nick Clegg told me so.

    😏

  24. MR,Seamus.

    Now, the real irony lies with Brussels.

    They respect you, about as much as they do…me.

    I know, its not much to brag about, is it?

  25. “I know, I know..

    There will be no death penalty.”

    So that’s a no then. You can’t show where the Lisbon Treaty reintroduces the death penalty and requires it for rioting.

  26. 1. Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which the penalty is provided by law.

    What does “save” mean?

    save2
    Dictionary result for save
    /seɪv/
    preposition & conjunctionformal•literary
    preposition: save; conjunction: save

    except; other than.
    “no one needed to know save herself”

    Origin
    Middle English: from Old French sauf, sauve, from Latin salvo, salva (ablative singular of salvus ‘safe’), used in phrases such as salvo jure, salva innocentia ‘with no violation of right or innocence’.

    ‘other than’ – so let’s insert ‘other than’

    1. Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save other than in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which the penalty is provided by law.

    There it is – and the death sentence will be available against the Gilets Jaunes and Gelben Westen if/when they bring the filth of their ‘governments’ to toppling point

    https://www1.wdr.de/nachrichten/ruhrgebiet/gelbewesten-proteste-dortmund-politik-bundesregierung100.html

  27. Seamus.

    You and Wiki.

    Or, thevcLsbon Trraty , and professor?

    No disrespect, but i will stick with the latter.

    But thanks for your EU drone like input anyway.

    Some people “need” leaders.

    😏

  28. It is simply a restating of Article 2 of the ECHR. The removal of the Death Penalty came in Protocol 6 of the ECHR (which is also part of the Lisbon Treaty).

    So the Lisbon Treaty doesn’t legalise the death penalty. It bans it.

  29. “No disrespect, but i will stick with the latter.”

    Because, despite being factually wrong, it confirms your bias. Because you’re a dick.

  30. Actually, I can see where Seamus is coming from..

    As an Irishman, he has swapped one set of masters for another set of masters.

    Fair play to the serf I say.

    But, being an Englishman, its just not for me.. Good luck anyway Seamus with your new masters.

    😏

  31. Also, in terms of your professor Harri:

    https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority

  32. Because, despite being factually wrong, it confirms your bias. Because you’re a dick.

    Here we go..

    Liberal tolerance in action..again.

    What was it last time you got angry and frustrated Seamus?

    Racist cu**..?

    Liberals huh!

    Its a mental illness,the plague of the 21st century.

  33. Seamus –

    Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided by law”.

    I don’t think that means what you think it means.

  34. “I don’t think that means what you think it means.”

    Its Article 2 from the ECHR Inigo.

  35. “Racist cu**..?”

    I’m not angry or frustrated at the moment and I wasn’t angry or frustrated when I called you that. I like facts. And when you are being a racist cunt I’m going to call you a racist cunt.

    If you don’t like it then stop being a racist cunt.

  36. Lol!

    😂😂😂

  37. Pete.

    Go easy on Seamus.

    He is an Irishman, not a very proud one granted.

    But he has new masters now.

    Respect there Seamus.

  38. You still haven’t stated where the Lisbon Treaty requires the legalisation of the death penalty for rioting.

  39. Pete, have you read Article 2 in light of protocols 6 and 13?

    Seamus, as usual on legal matters, is correct.

    Lisbon bans rather than reinstates the death penalty.

  40. Seamus, on January 26th, 2019 at 9:15 PM Said:
    “Racist cu**..?”

    I’m not angry or frustrated at the moment and I wasn’t angry or frustrated when I called you that. I like facts. And when you are being a racist cunt I’m going to call you a racist cunt.

    If you don’t like it then stop being a racist cunt.

    Now, please feel free to correct me if I am incorrect, but are the only intolerant people on ATW, who have called someone else on ATW a Cut**..a dopey liberasl?

    Just how intolerant are liberals?

  41. “Now, please feel free to correct me if I am incorrect”

    Normally a good bet.

    “but are the only intolerant people on ATW, who have called someone else on ATW a Cut**..a dopey liberasl?”

    I don’t know what a Cut** is but it isn’t intolerant to refer to racist cunts as racist cunts. If you don’t want to be called a racist cunt then you have an easy solution – stop being a racist cunt.

  42. I don’t know what a Cut** is but it isn’t intolerant to refer to racist cunts as racist cunts. If you don’t want to be called a racist cunt then you have an easy solution – stop being a racist cunt.

    Lol!

    😂😂😂😂

  43. Seamus.

    You should have taken Colms wise advice.

    Calling someone a racist nowadays, thanks to you dopey liberals doing the term to the absolute death..means nothing, diddley squat.

    Shame on you..

    What is the matter with you people?

  44. “Calling someone a racist nowadays, thanks to you dopey liberals doing the term to the absolute death..means nothing, diddley squat.”

    Nope. Racist means racist. That you feel it doesn’t mean anything is probably one of the reasons that you are a racist cunt.

  45. Nope. Racist means racist. That you feel it doesn’t mean anything is probably one of the reasons that you are a racist cunt.

    Lol!

    😂😂

    Seamus I will give you 10/10 for your dopey liberal tenacity.

    😀😀

  46. Thank god the alcohol hits Harri early and he has to go to bed. Jesus christ – what a bore.

  47. Seamus, on January 26th, 2019 at 9:14 PM Said:

    “I don’t think that means what you think it means.”

    Its Article 2 from the ECHR Inigo.

    OK Seamus – what does it mean?

    No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which the penalty is provided by law.

    Emphasis on the word ‘save’

    And here’s something which all Europenas should either see for themselves or be aware of……..

    https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/01/what_i_learned_in_peace_corps_in_africa_trump_is_right.html

    January 17, 2018
    What I Learned in the Peace Corps in Africa: Trump Is Right
    By Karin McQuillan

    Three weeks after college, I flew to Senegal, West Africa, to run a community center in a rural town. Life was placid, with no danger, except to your health. That danger was considerable, because it was, in the words of the Peace Corps doctor, “a fecalized environment.”

    In plain English: s— is everywhere. People defecate on the open ground, and the feces is blown with the dust – onto you, your clothes, your food, the water. He warned us the first day of training: do not even touch water. Human feces carries parasites that bore through your skin and cause organ failure.

    Never in my wildest dreams would I have imagined that a few decades later, liberals would be pushing the lie that Western civilization is no better than a third-world country. Or would teach two generations of our kids that loving your own culture and wanting to preserve it are racism.

    Wherever Africans are to be found, they shall turn it into a literal shithole

    Last time I was in Paris, I saw a beautiful African woman in a grand boubou have her child defecate on the sidewalk next to Notre Dame Cathedral. The French police officer, ten steps from her, turned his head not to see.

    I have seen. I am not turning my head and pretending unpleasant things are not true.

    Senegal was not a hellhole. Very poor people can lead happy, meaningful lives in their own cultures’ terms. But they are not our terms. The excrement is the least of it. Our basic ideas of human relations, right and wrong, are incompatible.

    We have the right to choose what kind of country to live in. I was happy to donate a year of my life as a young woman to help the poor Senegalese. I am not willing to donate my country.

  48. “Emphasis on the word ‘save’”

    Yes because when the Article was originally written the Death Penalty was permissable under the ECHR. Protocol 6 of the ECHR was what got rid of the Death Penalty.

    Article 6 of the Lisbon Treaty incorporates the ECHR (without changing any of the wording) into EU law. So it retains the original Article 2 (which when drafted allowed the death penalty) but also includes Protocol 6 (which got rid of the Death Penalty).

  49. Article 6 of the Lisbon Treaty incorporates the ECHR (without changing any of the wording) into EU law. So it retains the original Article 2 (which when drafted allowed the death penalty) but also includes Protocol 6 (which got rid of the Death Penalty).

    Seamus – would you link to the words which abrogate the original Article 2. Article 2 is the section that we are discussing as attached by you.

  50. https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Library_Collection_P6_ETS114E_ENG.pdf

    Protocol 6:

    Article 1

    The death penalty shall be abolished. No-one shall be condemned to such penalty or executed.

    Article 2 of Protocol 6 does allow states to reintroduce the death penalty during war but as far as I am aware no signatory has ever done so.

  51. The Council of Europe countries are also all signitories to Protocol No. 13 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedom:

    https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Library_Collection_P13_ETS187E_ENG.pdf

    Emphasis on the word ‘save’

    Typical conspiracy therorism, zeroing in on a minor issue of interpretation in order to attempt to undermine the wider point. It’s an echo of Noel’s earlier point:

    These differences feed deniers, who jump at one instance of mercy and pretend it stands for the entire Jewish experience in the Holocaust.