***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 7 *****
=============================================================
Ongoing debate.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 28 Mar 16 at 00:50
|
>> Britain warned it wields no power in German-dominated EU
>>
>> www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/03/09/uk-wields-no-influence-in-german-dominated-eu-warns-iceland/
Says the well known influential prime minister of ICELAND?
ICELAND? THIS is the best you can come up with?
|
>> Says the well known influential prime minister of ICELAND?
>>
>> ICELAND? THIS is the best you can come up with?
>>
I'd put a tenner on it he has more knowledge on the subject than you or I.
|
SQ again! stop being lazy
>> I'd put a tenner on it he has more knowledge on the subject than you
>> or I.
I'd put 20 quid on you arguing with his credentials, influence and record if his view was the other way round.
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 10 Mar 16 at 13:08
|
>> I'd put 20 quid on you arguing with his credentials, influence and record if his
>> view was the other way round.
>>
Yeah, i'll wear that.
|
>>I'd put a tenner on it he has more knowledge on the subject than you or I.
Absolutely not.
What he will know about is what Iceland wants and what is best for Iceland. His opinion about that is or is not good for the UK will not be any more expert than most.
He, like all the others, is passing an opinion. In this case probably not even his own. You shouldn't have faith in people because of their job title.
|
>> You shouldn't have faith in people because of their job title.
>>
That's tantamount to sedition and/or treason under the British Constitution.
'Orf with 'is 'ead.
|
|
Faith in people .neq. Support for institution.
|
|
The two have to go hand in hand under the British Constitution, because there is no mechanism to remove the appointed parts of the Government/Legislature, i.e. Head of State and House of Lords. Any move against some of the people entrenched in those institutions is a treasonable offence.
|
>> The two have to go hand in hand under the British Constitution, because there is
>> no mechanism to remove the appointed parts of the Government/Legislature, i.e. Head of State and
>> House of Lords. Any move against some of the people entrenched in those institutions is
>> a treasonable offence.
Spot on.
Ergo the monarchy and the lords are important not for the power they wield, but for the power they deny to all except the legitimate government.
To the point. I always said the PM of Iceland was a bright bloke, so of course he wouldn't say that unless it suited Iceland's cause in some way.
He's obviously right though, essentially.
It doesn't necessarily mean the EU is a bad idea, but I don't understand why so many people refuse to see the 'democratic deficit' and why it is impossible to be a properly sovereign state within the EU.
To be clear, even supposing that the European parliament to which we send MEPs is the maker of laws and regulations, that control would self-evidently not be with the UK electorate which sends under 10% of the MEPs.
The Eurozone controls 65% of seats.
That is mainly why, despite being 'pro-Europe' by instinct, I have reservations about the UK's future in the EU while the financial stability of the eurozone is still a ticking bomb.
Incidentally, the flak that Carney got the other day, and the misrepresentation of what he actually said, was for something he actually said last October. The Brexit lobby can and will be just as disingenuous as the FUD spreaders.
goo.gl/AzB0Ws (Telegraph, October 2015)
Last edited by: Manatee on Thu 10 Mar 16 at 11:14
|
>> It doesn't necessarily mean the EU is a bad idea, but I don't understand why
>> so many people refuse to see the 'democratic deficit' and why it is impossible to
>> be a properly sovereign state within the EU.
>>
>> To be clear, even supposing that the European parliament to which we send MEPs is
>> the maker of laws and regulations, that control would self-evidently not be with the UK
>> electorate which sends under 10% of the MEPs.
The MEPs do NOT "make" the laws - the E.U. bureaucrats do.
The MEPs just vote on them, at indecent speed and with little time to study and evaluate that on which they are voting.
|
>> The MEPs do NOT "make" the laws - the E.U. bureaucrats do.
>> The MEPs just vote on them, at indecent speed and with little time to study
>> and evaluate that on which they are voting.
Thats UK bureaucrats as well by the way.
And just how fast is the voting? The voting is faster than it needs to be because a certain NF stands up and rants and raves refusing to vote on anything and using up time,
Oh and taking his expenses for using up time pointlessly.
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 10 Mar 16 at 17:11
|
First line. Let's not.
www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?v=e&t=21965&m=485426
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 10 Mar 16 at 11:17
|
That's why I changed my post from reading "monarch" to "Head of State" before hitting send. I'm trying to couch my argument in those terms in order to avoid another interminable Republic/Monarchy discussion, but there are germane points which need airing.
My point in this thread remains that it is disingenuous of the "Out" lobby to decry the democratic deficit in the EU whilst supporting that which exists within the UK (Manatee's point about our undemocratic institutions protecting the democratic ones is easily refuted, for example the current furore around our HoS seemingly supporting a political side of the argument when that institution should be publicly neutral - to do so could be to wield a powerful influence over people, with no accountability. You see the problem, I hope).
What we should be seeking to do is reform the EU and remove the democratic deficit, as we should be in the UK. IMHO. We can only do that from within the EU. The result would be a better Europe for all. Again, IMHO.
|
>>You see the problem, I hope
No, I genuinely do not.
In this particular case you would appear to be accepting the tabloid's word. Perhaps that is upsetting your stomach?
|
I was careful with my language - I used the words, 'seemingly' and 'could', indicating that it may or may not be the case that what The Sun says is true. If it's true, then anyone should be happy to stomach it on the basis that it's the truth, however distasteful the messenger usually is.
The hypothetical problem which I hoped you understood is clear. The fact we are having to discuss the matter about whether the person representing the institution of our unelected Head of State is expressing public political opinions when they shouldn't do so is symptomatic of a poor system and would be avoided under better alternatives.
|
I don't agree.
I like having the Monarchy and I would like to keep it for ever.
I can think of no system, whether you think it a better alternative or not, which a newspaper couldn't write about and cause discussion.
|
>> The hypothetical problem which I hoped you understood is clear. The fact we are having
>> to discuss the matter about whether the person representing the institution of our unelected Head
>> of State is expressing public political opinions when they shouldn't do so is symptomatic of
>> a poor system and would be avoided under better alternatives.
Name an elected HoS who does not have political views and would not be campaigning vigorously on one side or the other. Just one will do.
|
>> Name an elected HoS who does not have political views and would not be campaigning
>> vigorously on one side or the other. Just one will do.
Current German President (Gauck) and former Irish President Mary Robinson. While both undoubtedly hold strong views on policy neither is immediately identified with one of their country's main parties.
|
>> While both undoubtedly hold strong views on policy neither is immediately identified with
>>one of their country's main parties.
But you think they would not be campaigning 'in' or 'out'?
|
>> But you think they would not be campaigning 'in' or 'out'?
I misunderstood your original post, responding to Al, to be about politics generally and domestic political (ie election) campaigns.
Suspect Mary Robinson, an internationalist, would be in favour of 'in'. Much the same for Germany's president.
But neither Germany nor Ireland have the UK's predilection for a large anti EU constituency in national politics.
|
>> Name an elected HoS who does not have political views and would not be campaigning
>> vigorously on one side or the other. Just one will do.
>>
Maybe I'm saying an elected HoS should have political views and be allowed to express them?
But Maybe I'm not. I didn't say either way. Maybe we don't need a HoS, maybe the PM can provide the role, it's a multifarious topic for sure. But here I'm just discussing a hypothetical point in relation to the EU IN/OUT topic which this thread is supposed to be about.
Mantee has provided his opinion on that matter with a valid point in rebuttal (one I disagree with), everyone else is failing to debate my point and trying to play the man/Republican card.
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 10 Mar 16 at 13:58
|
>> Faith in people .neq. Support for institution.
I've no idea what this neq means. Is it a typo? The best Google does is 'Net Explosive Quantity' but the way you've used it makes it look like jargon.
|
>> What he will know about is what Iceland wants and what is best for Iceland.
>> His opinion about that is or is not good for the UK will not be
>> any more expert than most.
Yes, I agree with that... however, I still think he'll have more knowledge on the subject than most, if not all, of us on here.
|
>> he'll have more knowledge on the subject than most, if not all, of us on here.
Yeah, he didn't get where he is today by being on here...
|
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03m5h5v
Hahahaha....that makes me laugh !
|
The wife, I cannot remember her name, what an utter plank. No idea of the issues, no self-awareness, no sense of irony, but wants the UK to leave the EU because she knows that immigrants take benefits. And the Spanish see her and know that she's British, which rather explains what they generally think of British retirees and expats. Laughable really.
An ex-girlfriend, Roger?
|
Senior Tory MEP backs Brexit in blow to David Cameron
David Cameron has been dealt a major blow after Syed Kamall, the Tories most senior MEP, announced he was backing Brexit because he wants a "fair immigration system",
Kamall is the leader of the ECR group, the European Parliament bloc that the Tories sit within.
He was a key player in the renegotiation, acting as a go-between for Downing Street and other MEPs who will be called on to pass the PM's migration reforms.
He said in the statement: "I think the Prime Minister got the best deal available. Whatever the result of the referendum he has probably done more than any other Prime Minister to redefine our relationship with the EU. He deserves great credit for that and for delivering the referendum.
"However, after much thought, my personal decision is that we should leave the EU. Not because I think David Cameron did a bad job, but because I believe that on balance we could forge a better future outside.
"Ultimately the key issue for me is immigration. I want to see a Britain where everyone can achieve their ambitions whether they come from a wealthy or poorer background. Equally, I would like an immigration policy that is balanced and fair - where we treat people equally whether they are from an EU country or not. Sadly, a fair immigration system is incompatible with membership of the EU."
"I am the son of immigrants from outside the EU - this matters to me deeply. I always tell aspiring politicians to be true to their consciences - so I must be true to mine. Ultimately I would favour a points-based immigration system where your ability is more important than which country you come from. Unfortunately, you cannot have that in the EU."
|
An admirably laid out argument, one which deserves much respect. I agree with much he says.
However, where I differ wildly is that immigration is not the key issue. "It's the economy, stupid."
|
>> An admirably laid out argument, one which deserves much respect. I agree with much he
>> says.
>>
>> However, where I differ wildly is that immigration is not the key issue. "It's the
>> economy, stupid."
Indeed, people seem to find the concept that europeans are coming here because our economy is good, and europeans here are further boosting our economy, a bit alien.
The Brexits are focusing on the immigration fear angle, because they don't have any other lever.
Last edited by: Zero on Fri 11 Mar 16 at 12:38
|
I'm with Al.
Firstly a very reasonable discussion from a reasonable man. The Outties would do a lot better to lose the ridiculous and the thick mumblers who don't understand the issues and trot out the intelligent capable of stringing a sentence together.
Where I also agree with Al is that immigration is not the main REAL issue, its just the main perceived issue amongst the mumblers as well as some of the more coherent.
However, if I read his note correctly I presume he would be much more comfortable with the EU if we gave EVERYONE the same immigration rights that EU citizens have? Or wasn't that quite what you meant, Roger?
|
|
As he represents the largest group of immigrants in the UK, his fear is that he will loose influence should that not remain the case.
|
>> However, if I read his note correctly I presume he would be much more comfortable with the EU if we gave EVERYONE the same immigration rights that EU citizens have? Or wasn't that quite what you meant, Roger?
I think it is other way round - give all EU citizens same right as any non EU citizen has got while immigrating to UK at present.
|
No, he seemed to be pretty clear that he thought the EU had an unfair advantage and everybody should have the same advantages.
|
>> The wife, I cannot remember her name,
It'll be on your marriage certificate ;)
|
Firstly that'd be the difference between "The wife" and "My wife".
Secondly, I cannot imagine a situation where I would be rude enough, stupid enough or suicidal enough to refer to her as a plank in private, never mind in public.
|
Many people I know refer to their missus as "the wife"
>> I would never be rude enough, stupid enough or suicidal enough to refer to her as a plank in private, never mind in public.
Hence why I omitted that bit, because I know you're too henpecked to even try ;)
|
>>>you're too henpecked to even try ;)
I'm too henpecked to even think about the merest possibility of trying.
They can read your thoughts, you know.
|
>> They can read your thoughts, you know.
Her thoughts are mine. Or so she tells me.
|
|
Mine can read me like a book....a book with no index and only two chapters, but still
|
|
Two chapters!? b***** intellectual.
|
My wife has no idea who I really am, very few do and even they are bound by the official secrets act...
;-)
|
|
So looks like Gove has been scratched from forthcoming Buck House garden parties.
|
I have been well out of this debate as an arm chair activist. All I will say is I am in favour of staying in the EU. There are a lot of things that needs to be changed and I am not completely pro EU in any sense of the word. However I am imagining a world where Trump is the president of the USA, the Tories are still in power and the UK is out of the EU. I just cannot imagine anything worse. I get back from Spain one and a half weeks from the debate and I am seriously thinking of not coming back.
I know this site is from HJ and as such as possibly slightly to the right but the older I get the political I seem to get. Ten years ago I really did not give a toss about politics and now I am finding it is one of my only passions to point I am studying it at futrelearn.
|
>> I know this site is from HJ and as such as possibly slightly to the
>> right
Understatement of year material there Ratts. This site has an extreme list to starboard.....
|
>> Understatement of year material there Ratts. This site has an extreme list to starboard.....
>>
You think this place is a bit right wing, some forums make this place look like a TUC meeting! Pistonheads for example.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Sun 13 Mar 16 at 10:17
|
>>I am studying it at futrelearn.
Would that be the course titled "Why The European Union?"? If so, see you there.
|
>> >>I am studying it at futrelearn.
>>
>> Would that be the course titled "Why The European Union?"? If so, see you there.
I did a criminal forensic science course ont here, just for the crack. (<- see what i did there?)
Not sure I'd get a job as a CSI on the strength of it.
|
>> >> I know this site is from HJ and as such as possibly slightly to
>> the
>> >> right
>>
>> Understatement of year material there Ratts. This site has an extreme list to starboard.....
>>
I'd class this forum as leaning to the soft right. In the main peoples views vary as to the subject being discussed, those who are economically right wing often have what are considered left wing or liberal views on other matters, pretty much like the population in general.
|
I am you are we are he is she is something something all together...
Carolina teacake climbing up the Eiffel tower
Man you've been a naughty girl you let your (knickers down?)...
I am the eggman
We are the eggmen
I am the walrus (googoo goo joob).
They weren't bad, the Beatles. Had a bit of culture but didn't wave it about.
|
|
We all live in a yellow submarine without realising it until someone with my brain points it out, bit like the Emperors clothes see.
|
"This site has an extreme list to starboard..."
Most have abandoned ship. Must go. Got to re-arrange the deck chairs.
|
|
I'd say this site is mostly fairly middle of the road with a tiny handful of right-wing loons, and a tiny handful of extremist lefties. In common with the zeitgeist, we're mostly fairly moderate here.
|
>> > In the main peoples views
>> vary as to the subject being discussed, those who are economically right wing often have
>> what are considered left wing or liberal views on other matters,
>>
That's an astute observation, RO'R if I may say so.
I think I'd probably fit that description to some extent. Basically I'm laissez-faire on everything, which means let capitalism rip as long as it delivers the goods. But I find myself surprising liberal on things like civil liberties, justice, police, etc.
|
...extreme list to starboard...
Extreme, no; pronounced, yes. Not sure who MM's 'extremist lefties' are, though.
|
|
Anyone who thinks there are any extreme right wing loons on here leads a sheltered existence.
|
President Obama is visiting Britain in April to lecture us on how we should vote in OUR referendum. Following Mr Obama's visit, Mr Cameron has invited Mr Will.I.Takeyouforaride, the President of Giveusanythingwewantland, to speak to the UK in support of us remaining in the EU. Mr Will.I.Takeyouforaride is leader of that countries ruling party, the Wehatethewest party, who have an enormous radical muslim population, exploding crime rates and a culture of fraud and extortion. They have no economy to speak of and wish to join the EU in order to take advantage of the EU's proven stupidity and to move eventually to Britain and destroy the culture, fill the Schools to beyond bursting, cripple the NHS and bankrupt public services.
Mr Will.I.Takeyouforaride said, " Mr Cameron wholly supports our aims, and has said he will support us fully in our attempt to become EU citizens, he has told me that the British people are mainly stupid, easily frightened. He assures me that they couldn't care less about the sacrifice their fathers and grandfathers made to keep their sovereignty and freedom, and don't give a second thought to the sort of Country their children and grandchildren will have to live in, it seems they only worry about something called a mortgage, and he is confident he can appeal to their selfish greed and exploit their fears to get them to do whatever he wants. I am very happy to support Mr Cameron in his quest to surrender his Countries sovereignty and destroy his Countries national identity, we are very much in accord in this vision of Britains future, and we see no reason why the British people should be allowed to interfere in it. Once Britain has been conned, threatened and lied into voting to stay in the EU we look forward to making them pay for their naive foolishness. " Mr Will.I.Takeyouforaride went on to say, "People of Britain, when we arrive and run roughshod over you, drag your Country into the gutter, take all we want, occupy your homes and ignore your laws, please do not think that we are not grateful to you for letting us do it, we are very grateful. Thank you."
|
|
I don't think that a really worth the wear and tear on your keyboard. Although obviously you saved the Return and Space Bar as much as you could.
|
Tis a cut & paste job from an email that is going around. I was going to poke it in the jokes thread, but being as it relates to our forthcoming exit from the EUSSR, I thought I would post it 'ere.
(*_*)
|
Roger,
Please, nay FFS, when posting these links could you provide a sentence or two of narrative summarising the content and telling us why it's relevant and worth reading
|
|
Do what Roger does, just read the title.
|
>> Roger,
>>
>> Please, nay FFS, when posting these links could you provide a sentence or two of narrative summarising the content and telling us why it's relevant and worth reading
>>
Genuine question, why?
|
>> Genuine question, why?
Partly a matter of courtesy but also it might just, exceptionally, persuade me that the shouted 'KATIE_HOPKINS' means anything other than avoid at any cost.
|
|
Fair enough, i never really thought of it as rude and the stuff roger puts on here doesn't really interest me tbh. I tried reading his bretbort links once, for example, but it's so shouty its unreadable.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Wed 23 Mar 16 at 21:16
|
>> Fair enough, i never really thought of it as rude
Forum protocol is pretty difficult to divine as forums vary but there's certainly been adverse comment elsewhere (Cyclechat) about habit of posting unsupported links. Guess it's a bit like a pub debate where arguments are 'advanced' by whacking competing newspapers onto the table......
Also makes a difference whether link is factual commentary or Opinion.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 23 Mar 16 at 21:40
|
|
Righto, can't say I've ever seen anyone on a forum call it rude before. Like I said it's not something i could consider as rude. But each to their own.
|
Brexit - economic impact manageable.
Bit of a shame if it is your job that is managed away!
Expect one of the first casualties of a Brexit to be the working hours directive and people forced to work extended hours like it or not - especially salaried folk that don't get paid overtime.
Last edited by: zippy on Wed 23 Mar 16 at 21:48
|
>> Expect one of the first casualties of a Brexit to be the working hours directive
>> and people forced to work extended hours like it or not - especially salaried folk
>> that don't get paid overtime.
What carp.
The working hours directive was invisible to me and I am sure many other salaried people. For a start my hours were never measured.
|
>>What carp.
>>The working hours directive was invisible to me and I am sure many other salaried people. >>For a start my hours were never measured.
I always thought that when someone uses expletives to get their point across, even when disguised, is, well, below par.
Just because there has been no impact to you does not mean that there has been no impact to many others who have benefited from the WTD.
A selfish view really.
Last edited by: zippy on Thu 24 Mar 16 at 10:11
|
>>I always thought that when someone uses expletives to get their point across, even when disguised, is, well, below par.
>> A selfish view really.
Fair enough, happy to apologise for the mild language and (worse in my view) unnecessarily aggressive phrasing.
I had just returned from one of my very infrequent visits to the pub so I put it down to drunkenness from my nearly three pints (allowing for short measure).
I had never perceived the working hours rules to have much relevance for salaried people, perhaps I was wrong - I wasn't being selfish, just saying that I think it has made very little difference to them.
Incidentally, the provisions of the working hours directive are now enshrined in UK law in the usual way - have we any reason to believe that they will be repealed or watered down?
Perhaps somebody can give us an example of benefiting from the rules, that have been in force since 2003? It is possible to opt out and as with Sunday working, I suspect many who do work over 48 hours against their wishes feel pressured into doing so.
Last edited by: Manatee on Thu 24 Mar 16 at 10:44
|
|
At my last "proper" employer we were "expected" to opt out (professional role). Mind you I didn't have a problem with that.
|
>> At my last "proper" employer we were "expected" to opt out (professional role).
Yeah, I think we've all signed that at our place. No overtime, but no timesheets either. You're just expected to do your job. Down to the management I guess - becomes a problem if they have an unreasonable idea of what your job is.
|
>>>>
>> Expect one of the first casualties of a Brexit to be the working hours directive
>> and people forced to work extended hours like it or not - especially salaried folk
>> that don't get paid overtime.
>>
I've never met a single person who had their hours altered because of that directive.
Have you?
|
|
I think that's a problem with enforcement of that law? Not an expert as that law passed me by and had no effect on me.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Thu 24 Mar 16 at 06:45
|
>> Expect one of the first casualties of a Brexit to be the working hours directive
>> and people forced to work extended hours like it or not - especially salaried folk
>> that don't get paid overtime.
Every company (these are all within FTSE 100) I worked for, on first day of job they made me sign a contract where I had to waive my working hour rights. So even when staying with EU, it makes do difference at all.
But in fairness, I only occasionally worked longer hours based on project needs.
What most people miss is that EU laws can be overwritten as and when needed - but not by common people but by politicians and their corporate friends only to serve their own need (or greed). EU is good in theory but terrible in execution.
I guess if EU made a change to prevent free movement of labour across member states that would have killed the migration debate and most people wouldn't even care to turn up at referendum.
Even though I am in OUT camp, I would not have bothered if EU was just trading agreement (which I believe how it was sold in 1970s).
|
>> Please, nay FFS, when posting these links could you provide a sentence or two of
>> narrative summarising the content and telling us why it's relevant and worth reading
Sad to see you have joined the bash-Roger-regardless group. Even I could work out from the link what that story was.
|
>> www.breitbart.com/london/2016/03/23/moodys-brexit-is-manageable/
Roger hasn't worked out that the Moodys report is saying there will be problems, and that even briebarts swing on it isn't enough to say its no problem.
|
|
I said before, he just reads the big words at the top. he posted unfavourable [to his POV] stories before by doing that.
|
|
LOL the Terrible Twins never give up do they? And people are saying elsewhere that F1 is boring... :-)
|
Strange how you find criticism of Roger less palatable than the stuff Roger spouts.
|
|
I can make my own mind up about that without your commentary.
|
>> Strange how you find criticism of Roger less palatable than the stuff Roger spouts.
>>
>>
I'm being consistent I'd say. I dislike some of the sneering, bullying and generally obnoxious behaviour I see here. I think as mods we're pretty patient with it, and I personally admire the tenacity of some of our posters, but once in a while I feel the urge to say something
I don't read most links, you'd know as an ex-mod how much time it takes just keep up with the posts. But I do get the gist of the kind of thing Roger links to. Over and over and over again unfortunately, and often twice per link.. :-)
|
LOL!
Put it down to old age and many years of decrepitude.
Last edited by: Roger. on Thu 24 Mar 16 at 09:14
|
>> LOL the Terrible Twins never give up do they? And people are saying elsewhere that
>> F1 is boring... :-)
If someone is going to post something they think is favourable to their beliefs, a lot, like loads of times a day, but it turns out to be the opposite, then they are going to get the pee taken out of them are they not?
|
I think most have had a sneaky read of the Katie Hopkins article and agree with it, but will never admit it because she says it as it is, and she's a woman:)
I know that feeling....!
So criticising Roger is really the only way they can respond and stay true to their previously published beliefs on the forum.
It's just a man thing, a smoke screen and no matter how much you deny it, it's true:)
Pat
|
Haven't read it, can't stand her. Don't care that she's a woman, makes no odds to me.
Criticise Roger because of his racist beliefs.
Smoke screen theory is garbage.
|
>> I think most have had a sneaky read of the Katie Hopkins article and agree> with it, but will never admit it because she says it as it is, and> she's a woman:)
I take it with that smiliey you don't actually believe that and are just joking?
|
Come on Pat Katie Hopkins is a nasty piece of work with brains
I think her mother loves her.>:)
|
Whatever you may think of Katie Hopkins, I do think she articulates what a considerable number of British people are thinking.
Her gender has nothing to do with it
You may disagree with those thoughts and look down from your lofty and yes - "right-on" snobbish - heights, despising her and Daily Mail readers both, but they ARE people who have their legitimate views and are entitled (just about, these days ) to express them and hold them.
|
, but they ARE people
>> who have their legitimate views and are entitled (just about, these days ) to express
>> them and hold them.
>>
>>
I don't think anyone has suggested otherwise?
|
>>is a nasty piece of work with brains<<
But not as many brains as she had a couple of weeks ago after her two very recent brain operations to try and slow down her constant epileptic fits.
I don't agree with all of her opinions but some of them are the same ones I hear from my worl colleagues on a daily basis.
I do absolutely admire her for having the courage stand up and speak her mind as well as the way she copes so well with her disability.
Pat
|
"I don't agree with all of her opinions but some of them are the same ones I hear from my worl colleagues on a daily basis."
I'm sorry to take issue with that, but long ago I came to the conclusion that KH is nothing more or less than a professional troll. Her belief or otherwise in the stuff she writes is subordinate to her desire to produce an effect and to achieve, if not fame, then notoriety.
"... there is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." (Oscar Wilde)
|
www.lingscars.com/
Very funny. (turn sound off first if you are at work!)
Last edited by: Manatee on Thu 24 Mar 16 at 11:19
|
I've just had two leaflets put though my door. One from the "Stay In" lot, and the other from the "Leave" brigade.
The stay in one is a colourful, glossy and quite large. The out one is just black and white - but was addressed to me personally. Both quote "facts" in support of their views, and leaving aside the overall in/out message, several of the "facts" are clearly contradictory and one of the leaflets must be wrong/lying.
So really, I suspect a lot of the vote will come down to 'who do you believe' and hard facts will be conspicuous by their absence.
Only reliable conclusion is the stay in lot have more money than the leave camp.
|
>> So really, I suspect a lot of the vote will come down to 'who do
>> you believe' and hard facts will be conspicuous by their absence.
>>
Course they will, facts on what will happen are never going to be reliable, they will always be guesses, predictions or estimates, they cannot be anything else.
Who do you trust? what do you think will happen if..?
We need the debate but in the end it will come down to feelings
FWIW I will be voting for staying in and I think we will stay in.
|
Found this on FB this morning:
www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=PFAX64v4Ldk&app=desktop
worth a listen, especially if you belive the "FEMA" stories!
|
Two identical letters today from Leave EU. Why two is not clear, both have my name and address in exactly same format. Any half decent mailing software would have flagged them as duplicates.
Mostly scaremongering about how much scaremongering the 'in' campaign will do together with request for donations and offer of Leave EU T shirt.
Shredded.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 24 Mar 16 at 16:46
|
"Shredded."
I will frame mine.
|
Sorry if I have missed this elsewhere in the multiplicity of posts,
why is the OUT campaign accusing the IN campaign of scaremongering?
when the OUT campaign is wholly based on scaremongering about staying IN.
Or have I missed the point. Perhaps Roger can explain.
|
I don't think there's any question that 'Remain' has conjured up as many scare stories as possible about the dangers of leaving, many of which are simply incredible, such as the "safer in" story based on our cooperation with other EU members on intelligence, as if that would stop; the "jungle will move to Kent" prediction; the one about leaving being devastating for English football; the one trotted out by IIRC Liz Truss on QT that we would lose all our export trade with the EU if we left; etc., etc.
Of course 'Leave' is coming out with some rubbish too, but Remain transparently bases its propaganda on FUD.
|
Jeremy Hunt says Brexit is a threat to the NHS.
www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/26/nhs-under-threat-from-brexit
The noise is my irony meter banging on it's endstop....
|
>> Jeremy Hunt says Brexit is a threat to the NHS.
I have to say, although I am firmly in the "stay" camp, I failed to see that one coming and find it pretty hard to reconcile!
|
Jeremy Hunt says Brexit is a threat to the NHS.
Er no Jeremy. Based on current performance, you personally are a bigger threat to the NHS than leaving the EU.
|
"Jeremy Hunt says Brexit is a threat to the NHS. "
If you really want to scare the gullible, then mention the NHS. But - it is the Grauniad reporting.
|
The Hunt story was all over UK media today.
Meanwhile, in 'you could not make it up' land Leave EU is employing european migrant workers...
www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/27/ukip-backed-leave-eu-brexit-campaign-employs-eu-migrants-arron-banks
|
Meanwhile in la-la land Bromp is still trying to imply that anyone proposing 'controlled' immigration is automatically 'anti-immigration'.
Pray tell Bromp, what is wrong with this quote:
"“My beef is not with immigration but with controlling immigration,†he said. “It can’t be unlimited. I would argue you bring in the people you need to fulfil the economy.â€
He said it would be wrong to discriminate against job applicants who were “legally in the country at the momentâ€.
or this:
"Svat said that his time on the campaign had left him supporting the end of Britain’s EU membership.
“There will be bigger controls and borders but that’s not a bad thing,†he said. “I see people from my own country who come here and are not working and I think it is not correct.â€
If Leave.EU didn't employ any immigrants you and the rest of the guardianistas would be wetting your pants over that.
|
|
Absolutely - you've saved me a reply to a typical "remain" obfuscation ðŸ‘
|
Don't push your luck Roger.
The Leave/Remain vote is too important to rely on spraying BS around, yet that's all we've had from BOTH sides so far.
|
Former head of MI6, Richard Dearlove, was doing media round earlier in week putting the case for Brexit improving our security. No doubt some thought given his position he must know his stuff. Here's a piece arguing why he's wrong:
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/mar/24/post-brexit-immigration-controls-stop-uk-isis-attcks
|
A list of 250 business leaders who support Britain leaving the EU has been published by the Vote Leave group.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35901811
|
>> A list of 250 business leaders who support Britain leaving the EU has been published
>> by the Vote Leave group.
>>
>> www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35901811
But there are no current FTSE 100 chief executives or chairmen
Actually, that makes it look worse for Brexit, they are all has-beens, failures or sacked.
|
Large MNCs wants to stay in EU as it suits their financial needs e.g. siphon profits as loan to subsidiary companies in oher EU countries, cheap labour pool etc.
For a humble common man, he can't get benefitted in that way. That's why for many common men being out of EU is better deal.
|
From the, admittedly unscientific, feedback from our local GO street stalls, the majority of men/women in the street, support "leave" when spoken to. People have actually been approaching the stalls asking for leaflets - almost unprecedented in our campaigners' experience.
How this will translate into "Leave" votes on the day is another matter: the difficulty is getting intentions into actions given built-in apathy.
It has been said that the out campaigners and voters are more passionate and more likely to turn out to the polling booths, though.
|
I can't help finding it funny that UKIP has picked the worst possible time to tear itself apart.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35895010
It must be very depressing for you.
|
|
Just like we'll be in a few months time - have been members of the Soviet styled, over-centralised €uropean Union.
|
I think I've hard it said that SMEs (small & medium enterprises) in Britain employ many, many more people that FTSE Top 100 companies.
If so, non FTE 100 executives speak for fewer people than might be imagined
|
However there's bound to be an alternate measure which works the other way... I was thinking Company Tax Paid, but maybe not :-)
And of course many many SMEs have no trade outside the UK, or event he town they are located in..
It's all bull...
|
>> they are all has-beens, failures or sacked.
>>
Hardly. Spinning like a top there Z.
But it is a curious mix. I can't really make anything from the inclusion of, say, the CEO of Dunstanburgh golf course and I wouldn't instinctively give his opinion more value than mine.
There are quite a few private equity types there who as a breed are pretty sharp but also (generally) quite mercenary - to what extent they think Brexit, or supporting Brexit (not necessarily the same thing) is better for them v. better for the country, we don't know (same might apply for some Remain supporters of course).
Tim Martin is on the list; he has also had a go at Cameron, probably unnecessarily as Cameron's general smarmy style and flashes of nastiness are counter-productive anyway.
www.theguardian.com/business/2016/mar/11/pro-brexit-wetherspoon-boss-tim-martin-cameron-paisleyite-scare-tactics-eu-referendum
We shouldn't be surprised that FTSE100 boards, where they are prepared to make their views known, lean to Remain. They are the oil tankers of the business world, have invested a lot of money in the status quo, and will always prefer less disruption to more.
|
>> >> they are all has-beens, failures or sacked.
>> >>
>>
>> Hardly. Spinning like a top there Z.
Not at all, none of them are current leaders of anything of note, except the Wetherspoons bloke who ironically employs every cheap european he can!
Last edited by: Zero on Sat 26 Mar 16 at 13:09
|
The list
goo.gl/dp2B5C
Last edited by: Manatee on Sat 26 Mar 16 at 12:44
|
|
It doesn't matter a jot to me what business leaders advise us to do, they are as clueless as everyone else. If we'd listened to the CBI we'd now be stuck with the Euro, just as we were with the ERM before we had to bail out to stop the economy collapsing.
|
EU IN/OUT Referendum Thursday 23/6/16 Volume 5. - Dog
