I've experienced similar, for work I was a few days in the Italian city of Bergamo and twice a gentleman came up to me shaking my hand inquiring how I was doing.
I must have an Italian look alike:)
(CNN)Racial abuse is on the rise in post-Brexit Britain, a Conservative British MP said as police confirmed they were investigating several racially motivated crimes.
Anti-immigrant leaflets saying "Leave the EU - no more Polish vermin" were put on cars near a school, local police said, the day after the country voted to leave the European Union.
On Sunday, the Polish Social and Cultural Association in Hammersmith, west London, was allegedly vandalized with a racist slogan.
It is a well tested legal principle you can't change existing contracts unless all parties involved agree.
Now you could imagine the government amends the contracts in a way the telco's like and agree with but that's not enough, consumer organisations would have a good chance of challenging such an anti-consumer amendment in court.
Ignorance eh?
Yes sure the EU could change the rules of the game but that doesn't fly well with either the member countries ("The Counsel") or the EU parliament.
Maybe you should learn on how agreement is reached in The Counsel, they would need a double majority (Number of member states + 66-74% of the relative population), something impossible with what these conniving telco's are suggesting.
Besides, changing a contract after it was signed is only applicable for new contracts, the existing contracts are excluded from the change, something that would really bite those complaining:)
Uhhh, no the EU has not issued licenses, all the EU does is assure a level playing field between countries.
Licenses are handed out (sold for good money) by the individual member countries.
Alone the fact these telcos are offering such good money is proof they believe it'll make them money by following the known net neutrality rules, they just want to burn the candle from both ends, the subscriber/consumer and also those with the content.
So?
GB never lost sovereignty, they gave it added value by combining it with that of other EU nations.
Basically people were too lazy to follow the news and read the tabloids instead.
Surprise, I was around all these years during which Europe slowly build up treaty after treaty to what is now the EU.
Except for the UK government very few complained, it was and it is a damn good idea to bring together people that live so closely together and have a similar culture.
Yes even though there is diversity these present 28 countries do have a closely related culture compared to Africa or Asia.
Your idea of Merkel importing Jew haters is preposterous and to suggest such is beyond the pale.
Remember that in 1946 even Churchill called for a United States of Europe, we were very much used to that idea but also knew it would need a careful and thus slow build up, it was only later that extreme left and right wingers (like Margaret Thacher was and Corbyn looks like he is) started to moan because they saw they were losing the chance to achieve their own goals.
The anti-EU groups are without exception playing the populist card instilling fear for something unknown and like Boris and Nigel shamelessly bending the truth.
My my, so much anger and so little knowledge!
The sovereign people of the EU should be able to make laws, so far they can only write 'frameworks' that the individual states need to turn into national law.
Such laws need to pass their national parliament what can refuse passing it if they fill it's not in the interest of the nation.
What do you mean with 'far away'?
The EU parliament is directly elected, the commission (with all it's faults) is selected by our elected governments.
The physical distance between most EU capitals and Brussels is often less than from the US or Canadian state/provincial capitals to Washington and Ottawa.
You should really stop reading them tabloids and wake up to the facts.
I've been looking at it since the inception of the EEG/EC and now EU and I wonder what you are implying with this word 'dares'.
The EU is just another group of friendly nations deliberating what way forward has the most benefits for the members.
Eventually it'll come to a vote and the majority wins, there is no daring involved.
But because Germany is doing quite well you'd be a fool to simply ignore their wishes, they've like had a good thought about their proposal and you better come up with a better argument before dishing it.
Now proposals by France are a different matter...
Have a read about the way the EU parliament works, it will enlighten you with the knowledge that not the Germans nor any other single country can dictate policies. http://www.europeanlawmonitor....
That's why we should give (more) direct power to the EU parliament and institutions, when we combine European forces there is less need for expensive local departments.
The UK is making billions on trade with the EU, so what part of the EU is bad for the UK???
And because trade on international scale is reciprocal so will the ex-EU partners suffer from this split.
What do you mean with 'loss of sovereignty?
One of the great things of the present EU is that we now use our combined sovereignty in with the other members and be much stronger.
We didn't lose it, we morphed it into something better.
You conveniently keep forgetting all these countries signing up to EU treaties do so with consent of their democratically elected parliament, it's called 'representative democracy' and it generally works fine. The idea of EU tyranny is utter rubbish, any of the member states has the ability to pull the plug on any rules the EU proposes. Plus since a couple of years the EU parliament can stop such legislation. http://www.europeanlawmonitor.org/how-do-i/eu-law-getting-an-eu-proposal-blocked-in-the-european-parliament.html
Oh and by the way, your view of the present Germans including Merkel couldn't be more wrong.
Indeed it can.
But in the mean time the recent changes in the EU-UK 'contract' have been repealed meaning the UK now needs to follow the rules that all others do.
And don't expect any understanding from the other EU countries.
Indeed, 'eurocrats' is one of these deceptive words.
Each one of them has been appointed by a democratically elected government so what's the problem?
Oh you mean the EU parliament can't propose laws, well it has always been the UK that vetoed this wish by the other member states to give it such powers.
Slashdot Mirror
I've experienced similar, for work I was a few days in the Italian city of Bergamo and twice a gentleman came up to me shaking my hand inquiring how I was doing. :)
I must have an Italian look alike
You're the oneon the left or right?
http://www.memecenter.com/fun/...
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06...
(CNN)Racial abuse is on the rise in post-Brexit Britain, a Conservative British MP said as police confirmed they were investigating several racially motivated crimes.
Anti-immigrant leaflets saying "Leave the EU - no more Polish vermin" were put on cars near a school, local police said, the day after the country voted to leave the European Union.
On Sunday, the Polish Social and Cultural Association in Hammersmith, west London, was allegedly vandalized with a racist slogan.
It is a well tested legal principle you can't change existing contracts unless all parties involved agree.
Now you could imagine the government amends the contracts in a way the telco's like and agree with but that's not enough, consumer organisations would have a good chance of challenging such an anti-consumer amendment in court.
(BTW, sorry for misspelling council in the OP)
Ignorance eh?
:)
Yes sure the EU could change the rules of the game but that doesn't fly well with either the member countries ("The Counsel") or the EU parliament.
Maybe you should learn on how agreement is reached in The Counsel, they would need a double majority (Number of member states + 66-74% of the relative population), something impossible with what these conniving telco's are suggesting.
Besides, changing a contract after it was signed is only applicable for new contracts, the existing contracts are excluded from the change, something that would really bite those complaining
Uhhh, no the EU has not issued licenses, all the EU does is assure a level playing field between countries.
Licenses are handed out (sold for good money) by the individual member countries.
Alone the fact these telcos are offering such good money is proof they believe it'll make them money by following the known net neutrality rules, they just want to burn the candle from both ends, the subscriber/consumer and also those with the content.
So?
GB never lost sovereignty, they gave it added value by combining it with that of other EU nations.
Basically people were too lazy to follow the news and read the tabloids instead.
Insightful +1
Surprise, I was around all these years during which Europe slowly build up treaty after treaty to what is now the EU.
Except for the UK government very few complained, it was and it is a damn good idea to bring together people that live so closely together and have a similar culture.
Yes even though there is diversity these present 28 countries do have a closely related culture compared to Africa or Asia.
Your idea of Merkel importing Jew haters is preposterous and to suggest such is beyond the pale.
Remember that in 1946 even Churchill called for a United States of Europe, we were very much used to that idea but also knew it would need a careful and thus slow build up, it was only later that extreme left and right wingers (like Margaret Thacher was and Corbyn looks like he is) started to moan because they saw they were losing the chance to achieve their own goals.
The anti-EU groups are without exception playing the populist card instilling fear for something unknown and like Boris and Nigel shamelessly bending the truth.
My my, so much anger and so little knowledge!
The sovereign people of the EU should be able to make laws, so far they can only write 'frameworks' that the individual states need to turn into national law.
Such laws need to pass their national parliament what can refuse passing it if they fill it's not in the interest of the nation.
That's why it's better for the UK to remain part of the EU so they have equal influence on the EU policies.
What do you mean with 'far away'?
The EU parliament is directly elected, the commission (with all it's faults) is selected by our elected governments.
The physical distance between most EU capitals and Brussels is often less than from the US or Canadian state/provincial capitals to Washington and Ottawa.
You should really stop reading them tabloids and wake up to the facts.
I've been looking at it since the inception of the EEG/EC and now EU and I wonder what you are implying with this word 'dares'.
The EU is just another group of friendly nations deliberating what way forward has the most benefits for the members.
Eventually it'll come to a vote and the majority wins, there is no daring involved.
But because Germany is doing quite well you'd be a fool to simply ignore their wishes, they've like had a good thought about their proposal and you better come up with a better argument before dishing it.
Now proposals by France are a different matter...
I'm intrigued by this commercial airlock, does it mean it cost money to build or does it simply have a credit card slot to pay for entrance?
Interresting.
I wonder where this 'tool' is located, Kubuntu 16.04 does not show it, nor do the repositories.
Does that mean I'm safe?
Have a read about the way the EU parliament works, it will enlighten you with the knowledge that not the Germans nor any other single country can dictate policies.
http://www.europeanlawmonitor....
So?
Does this not happen in council or national politics?
That's why we should give (more) direct power to the EU parliament and institutions, when we combine European forces there is less need for expensive local departments.
The UK is making billions on trade with the EU, so what part of the EU is bad for the UK???
And because trade on international scale is reciprocal so will the ex-EU partners suffer from this split.
What do you mean with 'loss of sovereignty?
One of the great things of the present EU is that we now use our combined sovereignty in with the other members and be much stronger.
We didn't lose it, we morphed it into something better.
You conveniently keep forgetting all these countries signing up to EU treaties do so with consent of their democratically elected parliament, it's called 'representative democracy' and it generally works fine.
The idea of EU tyranny is utter rubbish, any of the member states has the ability to pull the plug on any rules the EU proposes.
Plus since a couple of years the EU parliament can stop such legislation.
http://www.europeanlawmonitor.org/how-do-i/eu-law-getting-an-eu-proposal-blocked-in-the-european-parliament.html
Oh and by the way, your view of the present Germans including Merkel couldn't be more wrong.
Indeed it can.
But in the mean time the recent changes in the EU-UK 'contract' have been repealed meaning the UK now needs to follow the rules that all others do.
And don't expect any understanding from the other EU countries.
Indeed, 'eurocrats' is one of these deceptive words.
Each one of them has been appointed by a democratically elected government so what's the problem?
Oh you mean the EU parliament can't propose laws, well it has always been the UK that vetoed this wish by the other member states to give it such powers.
Try to remember who is your Head of State :)