Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Emotional twaddle. You talk as if the EU is some superstate. It isnt. Every country in the EU has different laws and taxation systems. Every country in the UK has different laws. What more do you want ?You are applying common sense to an emotional argument. The two arent going to mix.But the UK didn't have to let in refugees. It did, and it was the UK GOVERNMENT that decided this.
So, what's this got to do with the EU?
This is the Brexit case.
1. We leave the EU.
2. We kick out everybody we dont want here and close our borders.
3. Nobody takes reciprocal action because.......we are British.
4. We set up new trade agreements with the EU on as good terms as we had when we were in it - with no downside.
We wont have to pay tarrifs,we wont have to agree to join Schengen and we definately wont have to let in any bloody foreigners...........becasue we are British.
5. Meanwhile our wily British businessmen are exploiting new markets that have never existed before to make up a supposed shortfall in exports that wont exist anyway because we are................British.
What could go wrong ?
What could go wrong, you say ? Well ...
1. The Brexit case could fail, and we remain within the EU, resigned to perpetual dictatorship from a foreign power ...
2. If we do leave, the true nature of the Brexit opposition becomes apparent. Tariffs are insisted upon, regardless - and we see just how dictatorial and actually spiteful, the Brexit opposition has always been.
However, at least if we do leave, our own people will have sufficient freedom to choose to accept those tariffs, or to not do so. We will be free, as we are NOT right now, to seek other trade agreements with other nations .. and to get them.
Oh yes, I forgot. You just want to kick out the foreigners.
Ah, the race card again ... Lefties keep trotting that one out, don't they ?
Show me any example of where I've so much as hinted that I want 'foreigners kicked out'. That, Tommy, is your invention.
I suppose I do talk as though the EU is 'some superstate', as you put it. A mite premature of me, to be sure ... but it's only a matter of timing, of progress made towards that end. The EU has its own Parliament. Its own currency. Its own lawmaking machinery, which Member States are expected to incorporate within their own systems. If the EU doesn't yet qualify as a 'superstate', it's definitely created the infrastructure to permit it to become one.
They've even talked of creating an EU army ... !!
Jean-Claude Juncker calls for EU army
The European Union needs its own army to help address the problem that it is not “taken entirely seriously” as an international force, the president of the European commission has said.
As for the intended path, the fate, of the EU ... the same individual .. the President of the European Commission, no less !! .. has this to declare !! ...
Falling into a European superstate
In a scarcely-veiled reference to David Cameron, Juncker said, “Prime ministers must stop listening so much to their voters and instead act as full-time Europeans. Elected leaders are making life difficult because they spend too much time kowtowing to public opinion rather than working on historic projects like the Euro.”
.. yes. How DARE our Prime Minister listen to the will of his own people. The EU's own interests, according to Juncker, MUST override them !!
Another quote ...
The declared aim of the European project was from the start, back in the 1940s, the dissolving of national identities and the creation of a superstate. Jean Monnet, a founding father of the EU, wrote to a friend on 30th April, 1952: “Europe’s nations should be guided towards the superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation.”
The thing is, the EU will become a super state much quicker without the UK, the UK is probably the only one capable of joining forces together to stop it happening. The UK out of the EU as a superstate is probably WORSE than what exists right now.
You are applying common sense to an emotional argument. The two arent going to mix.Ooooooerrrrrrr. Not really a sensible threat to issue right now.
EU's latest THREAT: Do as we say over migrant quotas or you’ll lose your funding
EASTERN European countries who refuse to take in refugees face losing billions of pounds in European Union (EU) funding, a top Eurocrat has warned.
EU's latest THREAT: Do as we say over migrant quotas or you’ll lose your funding
This, of course, concerns 'refugees' who can't possibly have been adequately checked out beforehand. The sheer numbers involved argues for that ... as does the war-torn conditions of the region they've come from.
It seems that the EU has far less concern for its members' security concerns, and far more for dictating 'PC' imperatives of its own invention. An example of sheer power-dictatorship overriding the fundamental interests of individual nations.
But the UK didn't have to let in refugees. It did, and it was the UK GOVERNMENT that decided this.
So, what's this got to do with the EU?
This is the Brexit case.
1. We leave the EU.
2. We kick out everybody we dont want here and close our borders.
3. Nobody takes reciprocal action because.......we are British.
4. We set up new trade agreements with the EU on as good terms as we had when we were in it - with no downside.
We wont have to pay tarrifs,we wont have to agree to join Schengen and we definately wont have to let in any bloody foreigners...........becasue we are British.
5. Meanwhile our wily British businessmen are exploiting new markets that have never existed before to make up a supposed shortfall in exports that wont exist anyway because we are................British.
What could go wrong ?
This has been the problem. The Brexit people have come out with their emotional nonsense, and the stay side have caved in to the emotional side, instead of hammering the facts.
Wanting autonomy, wanting the freedom to self-govern, isn't 'emotional nonsense'. Any more than it was 'emotional nonsense' for conquered countries to want to be free of Hitler's Reich ...
Emotional twaddle. You talk as if the EU is some superstate. It isnt. Every country in the EU has different laws and taxation systems. Every country in the UK has different laws. What more do you want ?You are applying common sense to an emotional argument. The two arent going to mix.
This is the Brexit case.
1. We leave the EU.
2. We kick out everybody we dont want here and close our borders.
3. Nobody takes reciprocal action because.......we are British.
4. We set up new trade agreements with the EU on as good terms as we had when we were in it - with no downside.
We wont have to pay tarrifs,we wont have to agree to join Schengen and we definately wont have to let in any bloody foreigners...........becasue we are British.
5. Meanwhile our wily British businessmen are exploiting new markets that have never existed before to make up a supposed shortfall in exports that wont exist anyway because we are................British.
What could go wrong ?
What could go wrong, you say ? Well ...
1. The Brexit case could fail, and we remain within the EU, resigned to perpetual dictatorship from a foreign power ...
2. If we do leave, the true nature of the Brexit opposition becomes apparent. Tariffs are insisted upon, regardless - and we see just how dictatorial and actually spiteful, the Brexit opposition has always been.
However, at least if we do leave, our own people will have sufficient freedom to choose to accept those tariffs, or to not do so. We will be free, as we are NOT right now, to seek other trade agreements with other nations .. and to get them.
Oh yes, I forgot. You just want to kick out the foreigners.
Ah, the race card again ... Lefties keep trotting that one out, don't they ?
Show me any example of where I've so much as hinted that I want 'foreigners kicked out'. That, Tommy, is your invention.
I suppose I do talk as though the EU is 'some superstate', as you put it. A mite premature of me, to be sure ... but it's only a matter of timing, of progress made towards that end. The EU has its own Parliament. Its own currency. Its own lawmaking machinery, which Member States are expected to incorporate within their own systems. If the EU doesn't yet qualify as a 'superstate', it's definitely created the infrastructure to permit it to become one.
They've even talked of creating an EU army ... !!
Jean-Claude Juncker calls for EU army
The European Union needs its own army to help address the problem that it is not “taken entirely seriously” as an international force, the president of the European commission has said.
As for the intended path, the fate, of the EU ... the same individual .. the President of the European Commission, no less !! .. has this to declare !! ...
Falling into a European superstate
In a scarcely-veiled reference to David Cameron, Juncker said, “Prime ministers must stop listening so much to their voters and instead act as full-time Europeans. Elected leaders are making life difficult because they spend too much time kowtowing to public opinion rather than working on historic projects like the Euro.”
.. yes. How DARE our Prime Minister listen to the will of his own people. The EU's own interests, according to Juncker, MUST override them !!
Another quote ...
The declared aim of the European project was from the start, back in the 1940s, the dissolving of national identities and the creation of a superstate. Jean Monnet, a founding father of the EU, wrote to a friend on 30th April, 1952: “Europe’s nations should be guided towards the superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation.”
The thing is, the EU will become a super state much quicker without the UK, the UK is probably the only one capable of joining forces together to stop it happening. The UK out of the EU as a superstate is probably WORSE than what exists right now.
The logic of your case seems to be that we should stay in the EU in order to see to it that the EU becoming a Superstate happens to take longer to reach fruition. Regardless of the exact timetable, that direction IS the one intended, IS the one the EU is determined to see implemented. The one and only big question is ... do we, or do we NOT, want to be overtaken, ruled, by such a Superstate AT ALL.
Brexit Poll: Leave is falling away
The latest polls show that support for leaving is falling away.
The innate good sense of the British people comes to the rescue.
The outers are all about immigration but the real issue is jobs.
They cannot answer the most basic question.
I am doubtful if Brexit was ever real, or was a stunt to grab more capitulations from the Germans...
I assure you that UKIP does exist. And that they carry support for their aims and beliefs.
Their aims... what are their aims? And their beliefs, yeah, they have lots of beliefs, but not much reality.
Emotional twaddle. You talk as if the EU is some superstate. It isnt. Every country in the EU has different laws and taxation systems. Every country in the UK has different laws. What more do you want ?What could go wrong, you say ? Well ...
1. The Brexit case could fail, and we remain within the EU, resigned to perpetual dictatorship from a foreign power ...
2. If we do leave, the true nature of the Brexit opposition becomes apparent. Tariffs are insisted upon, regardless - and we see just how dictatorial and actually spiteful, the Brexit opposition has always been.
However, at least if we do leave, our own people will have sufficient freedom to choose to accept those tariffs, or to not do so. We will be free, as we are NOT right now, to seek other trade agreements with other nations .. and to get them.
Oh yes, I forgot. You just want to kick out the foreigners.
Ah, the race card again ... Lefties keep trotting that one out, don't they ?
Show me any example of where I've so much as hinted that I want 'foreigners kicked out'. That, Tommy, is your invention.
I suppose I do talk as though the EU is 'some superstate', as you put it. A mite premature of me, to be sure ... but it's only a matter of timing, of progress made towards that end. The EU has its own Parliament. Its own currency. Its own lawmaking machinery, which Member States are expected to incorporate within their own systems. If the EU doesn't yet qualify as a 'superstate', it's definitely created the infrastructure to permit it to become one.
They've even talked of creating an EU army ... !!
Jean-Claude Juncker calls for EU army
The European Union needs its own army to help address the problem that it is not “taken entirely seriously” as an international force, the president of the European commission has said.
As for the intended path, the fate, of the EU ... the same individual .. the President of the European Commission, no less !! .. has this to declare !! ...
Falling into a European superstate
In a scarcely-veiled reference to David Cameron, Juncker said, “Prime ministers must stop listening so much to their voters and instead act as full-time Europeans. Elected leaders are making life difficult because they spend too much time kowtowing to public opinion rather than working on historic projects like the Euro.”
.. yes. How DARE our Prime Minister listen to the will of his own people. The EU's own interests, according to Juncker, MUST override them !!
Another quote ...
The declared aim of the European project was from the start, back in the 1940s, the dissolving of national identities and the creation of a superstate. Jean Monnet, a founding father of the EU, wrote to a friend on 30th April, 1952: “Europe’s nations should be guided towards the superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation.”
The thing is, the EU will become a super state much quicker without the UK, the UK is probably the only one capable of joining forces together to stop it happening. The UK out of the EU as a superstate is probably WORSE than what exists right now.
The logic of your case seems to be that we should stay in the EU in order to see to it that the EU becoming a Superstate happens to take longer to reach fruition. Regardless of the exact timetable, that direction IS the one intended, IS the one the EU is determined to see implemented. The one and only big question is ... do we, or do we NOT, want to be overtaken, ruled, by such a Superstate AT ALL.
No, that's not really my logic at all.
My logic is far more complex than that.
Firstly. If the EU becomes a Superstate, which I hope it does not, then the UK is better off in it, and being able to dictate things within it than outside of it and having to do what the superstate says anyway.
Secondly, if the UK is in the EU, it can help to prevent a superstate. If the UK is outside, there's nothing to stop an EU superstate.
Thirdly, if the UK put as much effort into making the EU what it wants, as it does trying to leave the EU, then it might get somewhere.
What does UKIP do, exactly? It moans, complains, nothing else. It doesn't try and solve the problems, shape the EU into it's view of what the EU should be. Why? Because UKIP is a simplistic nationalistic party. It gets votes by talking about Churchill and the Battle of Britain, not by actually talking about things that are relevant.
It's using immigration as the biggest reason to pull out of the EU, even though the immigration that is annoying people isn't the immigration that would be changed from leaving the EU. I call that, at best, dishonest. All of their arguments are simplistic. When people ask what will happen after, they do what Helmut Kohl did in 1990.
You know history repeats itself, and this is a case that this could happen. Helmut Kohl told the unified German people that everything would be great and amazing. The SPD (Liberals) said it would be a hard road to prosperity as a unified country. The people wanted the nice view. So they voted for Kohl and his nice view. What they got was the hard road, and they weren't prepared for it.
You are applying common sense to an emotional argument. The two arent going to mix.This, of course, concerns 'refugees' who can't possibly have been adequately checked out beforehand. The sheer numbers involved argues for that ... as does the war-torn conditions of the region they've come from.
It seems that the EU has far less concern for its members' security concerns, and far more for dictating 'PC' imperatives of its own invention. An example of sheer power-dictatorship overriding the fundamental interests of individual nations.
But the UK didn't have to let in refugees. It did, and it was the UK GOVERNMENT that decided this.
So, what's this got to do with the EU?
This is the Brexit case.
1. We leave the EU.
2. We kick out everybody we dont want here and close our borders.
3. Nobody takes reciprocal action because.......we are British.
4. We set up new trade agreements with the EU on as good terms as we had when we were in it - with no downside.
We wont have to pay tarrifs,we wont have to agree to join Schengen and we definately wont have to let in any bloody foreigners...........becasue we are British.
5. Meanwhile our wily British businessmen are exploiting new markets that have never existed before to make up a supposed shortfall in exports that wont exist anyway because we are................British.
What could go wrong ?
This has been the problem. The Brexit people have come out with their emotional nonsense, and the stay side have caved in to the emotional side, instead of hammering the facts.
Wanting autonomy, wanting the freedom to self-govern, isn't 'emotional nonsense'. Any more than it was 'emotional nonsense' for conquered countries to want to be free of Hitler's Reich ...
Well it is.
Here's why.
The government is still going to be run by either the Tories or Labour. Many laws are going to be enacted that people don't like.
The EU is actually Democratic.
The European Commission, for example, the executive, is appointed by the member countries. Each country gets to put one person into the European commission. Johnathan Hill is the commissioner from the UK, he's a Tory, Catherine Ashton was the commissioner before, and she was Labour. (Doesn't always work like that, Chris Patton, a Tory was commissioner during a Labour govt).
Cameron nominated Hill for the position of commissioner.
The funny thing here is that in 2014 when he was nominated, Cameron, as PM, wasn't there with a majority of votes or a majority of seats. With 36.1% of the votes, he was basically controlling the UK. Democratic? Well, it depends on how you look at it. But then again whatever you have there, you have the Tories putting a guy into the European Commission.
How democratic is it for the commission to be made up of people appointed by the democratically elected leaders of their country?
The EU parliament is direct democracy.
So, it's all based around the people voting.
The difference is the UK parliament is elected by the people of the UK, the EU parliament by the people of the EU.
You see a difference. I don't. Someone votes and they don't get their choice, does it matter if their choice doesn't get in in the UK or the EU? Not much.
Then you have, for example, Scotland, Northern Ireland or Wales.
Scotland overwhelmingly voted SNP at the 2015 General Election, they got 1.4 million votes, that was 50% of the votes in Scotland, and they got what? A Tory majority government.
Wales got 25 Labour MPs, 11 Tory MPs out of 40 MPs, overwhelmingly Labour, and they got a Tory majority government.
Northern Ireland. Zero Labour, zero Tory, zero UKIP, zero Liberal Democrats, and they ended up with a Tory majority government.
Do you think any of these parts of the UK have any reason to feel that they will get "freedom to self govern" as you out it, from the UK general elections? No.
So again, is it emotional? Yes.
The English want to control the UK, but they see the EU in control of others so they don't want to be a part of it. They see Scotland and don't want independence, they see England and they want "independence".
Brexit Poll: Leave is falling away
The latest polls show that support for leaving is falling away.
The innate good sense of the British people comes to the rescue.
The outers are all about immigration but the real issue is jobs.
They cannot answer the most basic question.
I am doubtful if Brexit was ever real, or was a stunt to grab more capitulations from the Germans...
I assure you that UKIP does exist. And that they carry support for their aims and beliefs.
Their aims... what are their aims? And their beliefs, yeah, they have lots of beliefs, but not much reality.
And what is your 'reality' ?
Your reality is that we remain tied into a power-freaking foreign colossus that is serving its interests, and not ours. A powerhouse that exists to rob individual Nation States of their autonomy and subsume them into a single political entity, which the EU rules. Juncker made the EU's mindset clear, as I've posted. I've also posted evidence that this was the aim as far back as the 1950's.
Your reality would see such power-mongers succeed, for the sake of short-term economic 'gain' (unproven) and longer-term lack of political autonomy.
Mine would be to argue, and push, for our long-term freedom. I think we have a right to it. Don't you ?
Emotional twaddle. You talk as if the EU is some superstate. It isnt. Every country in the EU has different laws and taxation systems. Every country in the UK has different laws. What more do you want ?
Oh yes, I forgot. You just want to kick out the foreigners.
Ah, the race card again ... Lefties keep trotting that one out, don't they ?
Show me any example of where I've so much as hinted that I want 'foreigners kicked out'. That, Tommy, is your invention.
I suppose I do talk as though the EU is 'some superstate', as you put it. A mite premature of me, to be sure ... but it's only a matter of timing, of progress made towards that end. The EU has its own Parliament. Its own currency. Its own lawmaking machinery, which Member States are expected to incorporate within their own systems. If the EU doesn't yet qualify as a 'superstate', it's definitely created the infrastructure to permit it to become one.
They've even talked of creating an EU army ... !!
Jean-Claude Juncker calls for EU army
The European Union needs its own army to help address the problem that it is not “taken entirely seriously” as an international force, the president of the European commission has said.
As for the intended path, the fate, of the EU ... the same individual .. the President of the European Commission, no less !! .. has this to declare !! ...
Falling into a European superstate
In a scarcely-veiled reference to David Cameron, Juncker said, “Prime ministers must stop listening so much to their voters and instead act as full-time Europeans. Elected leaders are making life difficult because they spend too much time kowtowing to public opinion rather than working on historic projects like the Euro.”
.. yes. How DARE our Prime Minister listen to the will of his own people. The EU's own interests, according to Juncker, MUST override them !!
Another quote ...
The declared aim of the European project was from the start, back in the 1940s, the dissolving of national identities and the creation of a superstate. Jean Monnet, a founding father of the EU, wrote to a friend on 30th April, 1952: “Europe’s nations should be guided towards the superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation.”
The thing is, the EU will become a super state much quicker without the UK, the UK is probably the only one capable of joining forces together to stop it happening. The UK out of the EU as a superstate is probably WORSE than what exists right now.
The logic of your case seems to be that we should stay in the EU in order to see to it that the EU becoming a Superstate happens to take longer to reach fruition. Regardless of the exact timetable, that direction IS the one intended, IS the one the EU is determined to see implemented. The one and only big question is ... do we, or do we NOT, want to be overtaken, ruled, by such a Superstate AT ALL.
No, that's not really my logic at all.
My logic is far more complex than that.
Firstly. If the EU becomes a Superstate, which I hope it does not, then the UK is better off in it, and being able to dictate things within it than outside of it and having to do what the superstate says anyway.
Secondly, if the UK is in the EU, it can help to prevent a superstate. If the UK is outside, there's nothing to stop an EU superstate.
Thirdly, if the UK put as much effort into making the EU what it wants, as it does trying to leave the EU, then it might get somewhere.
What does UKIP do, exactly? It moans, complains, nothing else. It doesn't try and solve the problems, shape the EU into it's view of what the EU should be. Why? Because UKIP is a simplistic nationalistic party. It gets votes by talking about Churchill and the Battle of Britain, not by actually talking about things that are relevant.
It's using immigration as the biggest reason to pull out of the EU, even though the immigration that is annoying people isn't the immigration that would be changed from leaving the EU. I call that, at best, dishonest. All of their arguments are simplistic. When people ask what will happen after, they do what Helmut Kohl did in 1990.
You know history repeats itself, and this is a case that this could happen. Helmut Kohl told the unified German people that everything would be great and amazing. The SPD (Liberals) said it would be a hard road to prosperity as a unified country. The people wanted the nice view. So they voted for Kohl and his nice view. What they got was the hard road, and they weren't prepared for it.
The EU's purpose from the outset was, and is, to become a Superstate. We have no power to prevent that ambition of theirs.
The question is, do we want to have our autonomy as a Nation State preserved, our freedoms ditto ... or to have them crushed, over time ? I've posted all the evidence you need as to the real aims and purpose of the EU. On 23rd June, we can choose freedom, or the EU's long-term political conquest of us.
For myself ... I choose our freedom. As do many other Brits. As does UKIP.
You are applying common sense to an emotional argument. The two arent going to mix.But the UK didn't have to let in refugees. It did, and it was the UK GOVERNMENT that decided this.
So, what's this got to do with the EU?
This is the Brexit case.
1. We leave the EU.
2. We kick out everybody we dont want here and close our borders.
3. Nobody takes reciprocal action because.......we are British.
4. We set up new trade agreements with the EU on as good terms as we had when we were in it - with no downside.
We wont have to pay tarrifs,we wont have to agree to join Schengen and we definately wont have to let in any bloody foreigners...........becasue we are British.
5. Meanwhile our wily British businessmen are exploiting new markets that have never existed before to make up a supposed shortfall in exports that wont exist anyway because we are................British.
What could go wrong ?
This has been the problem. The Brexit people have come out with their emotional nonsense, and the stay side have caved in to the emotional side, instead of hammering the facts.
Wanting autonomy, wanting the freedom to self-govern, isn't 'emotional nonsense'. Any more than it was 'emotional nonsense' for conquered countries to want to be free of Hitler's Reich ...
Well it is.
Here's why.
The government is still going to be run by either the Tories or Labour. Many laws are going to be enacted that people don't like.
The EU is actually Democratic.
The European Commission, for example, the executive, is appointed by the member countries. Each country gets to put one person into the European commission. Johnathan Hill is the commissioner from the UK, he's a Tory, Catherine Ashton was the commissioner before, and she was Labour. (Doesn't always work like that, Chris Patton, a Tory was commissioner during a Labour govt).
Cameron nominated Hill for the position of commissioner.
The funny thing here is that in 2014 when he was nominated, Cameron, as PM, wasn't there with a majority of votes or a majority of seats. With 36.1% of the votes, he was basically controlling the UK. Democratic? Well, it depends on how you look at it. But then again whatever you have there, you have the Tories putting a guy into the European Commission.
How democratic is it for the commission to be made up of people appointed by the democratically elected leaders of their country?
The EU parliament is direct democracy.
So, it's all based around the people voting.
The difference is the UK parliament is elected by the people of the UK, the EU parliament by the people of the EU.
You see a difference. I don't. Someone votes and they don't get their choice, does it matter if their choice doesn't get in in the UK or the EU? Not much.
Then you have, for example, Scotland, Northern Ireland or Wales.
Scotland overwhelmingly voted SNP at the 2015 General Election, they got 1.4 million votes, that was 50% of the votes in Scotland, and they got what? A Tory majority government.
Wales got 25 Labour MPs, 11 Tory MPs out of 40 MPs, overwhelmingly Labour, and they got a Tory majority government.
Northern Ireland. Zero Labour, zero Tory, zero UKIP, zero Liberal Democrats, and they ended up with a Tory majority government.
Do you think any of these parts of the UK have any reason to feel that they will get "freedom to self govern" as you out it, from the UK general elections? No.
So again, is it emotional? Yes.
The English want to control the UK, but they see the EU in control of others so they don't want to be a part of it. They see Scotland and don't want independence, they see England and they want "independence".
The flaw in your argument is this: you argue that England exercises political power over the rest of the UK, and this you evidently believe is open to much criticism. YET ... you also argue for us to be committed to the EU, which will do to the UK 'the same' as you say England is doing to other countries within the UK.
You're fine with EU dominance (a foreign power, after all ..) ... over us all. You're apparently not fine with what you see as English dominance over others in the UK. What's wrong with this picture ?
I know one thing. I we held a referendum tomorrow to terminate all discussion on the subject of Brexit it would win with >90% positive. I seriously pity Americans having to put up with a year's worth of TV BS political propaganda come every election. Oh, actually, it's worse. Mid-term elections, police chief elections, mayoral elections. It would be enough to make you go out and shoot someone... Oh, Lol that's already a pastime in America.I think that this is where most sensible people are. Staying in will also protect jobs and should lead to greater investment as the uncertainty clears. It will also protect our human rights from politicians who cannot be trusted. Sick pay,holiday pay, minimum wages ,all under threat.I'm voting to stay in, but I've always been an "internationalist/federalist" and having travelled throughout most of Europe, I like the idea of a single currency and no border controls within the E.U. I don't mind surrendering national sovereignty so long as I can vote for whoever represents my views and aspirations in an effective Europe-wide government. I agree however the E.U. as it stands needs a major reform of it's institutions and some of it's policies.
Why take the risk ?
Brexit Poll: Leave is falling away
The latest polls show that support for leaving is falling away.
The innate good sense of the British people comes to the rescue.
The outers are all about immigration but the real issue is jobs.
They cannot answer the most basic question.
I am doubtful if Brexit was ever real, or was a stunt to grab more capitulations from the Germans...
I assure you that UKIP does exist. And that they carry support for their aims and beliefs.
Their aims... what are their aims? And their beliefs, yeah, they have lots of beliefs, but not much reality.
And what is your 'reality' ?
Your reality is that we remain tied into a power-freaking foreign colossus that is serving its interests, and not ours. A powerhouse that exists to rob individual Nation States of their autonomy and subsume them into a single political entity, which the EU rules. Juncker made the EU's mindset clear, as I've posted. I've also posted evidence that this was the aim as far back as the 1950's.
Your reality would see such power-mongers succeed, for the sake of short-term economic 'gain' (unproven) and longer-term lack of political autonomy.
Mine would be to argue, and push, for our long-term freedom. I think we have a right to it. Don't you ?
My reality is that often you have a choice between two bad situations.
The EU isn't the best of anything, but being out of the EU isn't the best of anything either.
HOWEVER, the arguments for leaving the EU don't measure up with the realities of leaving. There are reasons to leave, and I could make quite a good case, but none of those reasons would be what the Brexit people are harping on about.
What you're saying is there is a "foreign colossus" that is serving its own interests. I'm sorry, but many people don't think the Tories or Labour are representing their own interests.
The power mongers will succeed if the UK leaves. If the UK stays there's a bloc which can act against those people. But, like I've said before, it would require EFFORT rather than just moaning.
Britain is a can't do country, or what?
This forum is entitled 'Europe'.Why the hell are a bunch of Brits holding a rantfest about the EU/Brexit on a website dedicated to discussing America's issues?
Have you got nothing better to do? Nobody cares!I am doubtful if Brexit was ever real, or was a stunt to grab more capitulations from the Germans...
I assure you that UKIP does exist. And that they carry support for their aims and beliefs.
Their aims... what are their aims? And their beliefs, yeah, they have lots of beliefs, but not much reality.
And what is your 'reality' ?
Your reality is that we remain tied into a power-freaking foreign colossus that is serving its interests, and not ours. A powerhouse that exists to rob individual Nation States of their autonomy and subsume them into a single political entity, which the EU rules. Juncker made the EU's mindset clear, as I've posted. I've also posted evidence that this was the aim as far back as the 1950's.
Your reality would see such power-mongers succeed, for the sake of short-term economic 'gain' (unproven) and longer-term lack of political autonomy.
Mine would be to argue, and push, for our long-term freedom. I think we have a right to it. Don't you ?
My reality is that often you have a choice between two bad situations.
The EU isn't the best of anything, but being out of the EU isn't the best of anything either.
HOWEVER, the arguments for leaving the EU don't measure up with the realities of leaving. There are reasons to leave, and I could make quite a good case, but none of those reasons would be what the Brexit people are harping on about.
What you're saying is there is a "foreign colossus" that is serving its own interests. I'm sorry, but many people don't think the Tories or Labour are representing their own interests.
The power mongers will succeed if the UK leaves. If the UK stays there's a bloc which can act against those people. But, like I've said before, it would require EFFORT rather than just moaning.
Britain is a can't do country, or what?
But the power mongers will succeed if the UK remains, too. Maybe - MAYBE - we can stall their effort for a limited time, but not forever. We only have one vote amongst a couple of dozen others, after all !!
And at the end of it, we'll be at the tender mercy of a foreign colossus which, as I said, serves ITS interests, not ours.
Consider.The EEC began as mere trading bloc. Then the power-freaks moved in, created the EU, bound Member States into treaty obligations to the EU, these conferring power to the European Parliament - a Parliament that didn't exist under the old setup.
How 'successful' has the UK been in stopping any of this ? Answer ... Gordon Brown SIGNED US UP to the Lisbon Treaty !!
We have a chance to undo this wreckage on 23rd June, and reclaim what is ours by right ... the right to GOVERN OURSELVES.
You say that neither the Tories nor Labour are interested in the concerns of the ordinary citizen ? I can agree that this is true of Labour, who actually forbade us from having a Referendum. Though the Conservatives may - some of them - be pushing hard for continued membership, nonetheless, if it weren't for them, we'd have no Referendum ! I call that .... LISTENING ! Considering the ordinary citizen, not ignoring him.
Being out of the EU is very definitely the best of one specific thing. The chance to regain our political autonomy !!
Yes, that would, under the guise of 'USmessageboard', mean issues in Europe pertaining to the US? (i.e. There are similar UK message boards where UK topics could be discussed)This forum is entitled 'Europe'.Why the hell are a bunch of Brits holding a rantfest about the EU/Brexit on a website dedicated to discussing America's issues?
Well I haven't found any. But anyway, there are quite a few American posters who are interested in Europe. You don't have to read/post here if you're not one of them.Yes, that would, under the guise of 'USmessageboard', mean issues in Europe pertaining to the US? (i.e. There are similar UK message boards where UK topics could be discussed)This forum is entitled 'Europe'.Why the hell are a bunch of Brits holding a rantfest about the EU/Brexit on a website dedicated to discussing America's issues?
Lol, well there used to be a uk message board like this one. Maybe it was taken down because of lack of interest.Well I haven't found any. But anyway, there are quite a few American posters who are interested in Europe. You don't have to read/post here if you're not one of them.Yes, that would, under the guise of 'USmessageboard', mean issues in Europe pertaining to the US? (i.e. There are similar UK message boards where UK topics could be discussed)This forum is entitled 'Europe'.Why the hell are a bunch of Brits holding a rantfest about the EU/Brexit on a website dedicated to discussing America's issues?
I think I can invert your statement and say exactly the opposite.There are enough submissive people living in Britain these days that voting to wear the Franco/German yoke has great appeal. For them it's a fashion statement and that's all that's important.
Right, tainted Tommy?
There are some around but they are dead in comparison to this.Lol, well there used to be a uk message board like this one. Maybe it was taken down because of lack of interest.Well I haven't found any. But anyway, there are quite a few American posters who are interested in Europe. You don't have to read/post here if you're not one of them.Yes, that would, under the guise of 'USmessageboard', mean issues in Europe pertaining to the US? (i.e. There are similar UK message boards where UK topics could be discussed)This forum is entitled 'Europe'.Why the hell are a bunch of Brits holding a rantfest about the EU/Brexit on a website dedicated to discussing America's issues?
