Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

The influence of the EU on Britain.

1…556557559561562…607

Comments

  • Leuth
    Leuth Posts: 23,316
    edited December 2018
    (Sorry to my brethren for posting an article from Blairite wingnut website theguardian.com)
  • MuttleyCAFC
    MuttleyCAFC Posts: 47,729
    Good luck to them, as long as there are people stupid enough to seek them out and quote from them, it is justified.
  • Henry Irving
    Henry Irving Posts: 85,225
    Leuth said:

    Henry Irving said:

    kentaddick said:

    Henry Irving said:

    http://journal.quilliaminternational.com/2018/12/06/jews-the-british-labour-party-and-how-we-fell-out/

    @SDAddick @kentaddick

    But Corbyn has campaigned against racism all his life. Which automatically means he can never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever EVER EVER do anything racist or enable racist ever ever ever. EVER.
    Your problem @kentaddick is explained here

    https://quillette.com/2018/12/03/the-ideology-of-corbynism/
    It's amazing how these wingnut websites give the tell just with their name. Quillette. Something not quite right about that. And then you go to their 'about' page and there it is: Associate Editor Toby Young
    What's amazing is that you are Mutley have just done exactly what the article said you would but then again you know all about fighting the good fight on the internet and you do live "near" a council estate. I suppose Qulliam can be dismissed as well without addressing the underlying issue.
  • seriously_red
    seriously_red Posts: 5,741
    Leuth said:

    Henry Irving said:

    kentaddick said:

    Henry Irving said:

    http://journal.quilliaminternational.com/2018/12/06/jews-the-british-labour-party-and-how-we-fell-out/

    @SDAddick @kentaddick

    But Corbyn has campaigned against racism all his life. Which automatically means he can never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever EVER EVER do anything racist or enable racist ever ever ever. EVER.
    Your problem @kentaddick is explained here

    https://quillette.com/2018/12/03/the-ideology-of-corbynism/
    It's amazing how these wingnut websites give the tell just with their name. Quillette. Something not quite right about that. And then you go to their 'about' page and there it is: Associate Editor Toby Young
    Do you mean this Toby Young cited in this Guardian article?

    If yes, then that makes anybody promoting his views and that of his associates nothing but a "useful idiot". As posted higher up, the Tories are going into meltdown and their leader's main policy is about to be defeated. Surely the agenda should be around what happens next? And questions like is a second referendum the solution plus what is the appropriate question.
  • MuttleyCAFC
    MuttleyCAFC Posts: 47,729
    Henry Irving said:

    Leuth said:

    Henry Irving said:

    kentaddick said:

    Henry Irving said:

    http://journal.quilliaminternational.com/2018/12/06/jews-the-british-labour-party-and-how-we-fell-out/

    @SDAddick @kentaddick

    But Corbyn has campaigned against racism all his life. Which automatically means he can never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever EVER EVER do anything racist or enable racist ever ever ever. EVER.
    Your problem @kentaddick is explained here

    https://quillette.com/2018/12/03/the-ideology-of-corbynism/
    It's amazing how these wingnut websites give the tell just with their name. Quillette. Something not quite right about that. And then you go to their 'about' page and there it is: Associate Editor Toby Young
    What's amazing is that you are Mutley have just done exactly what the article said you would but then again you know all about fighting the good fight on the internet and you do live "near" a council estate. I suppose Qulliam can be dismissed as well without addressing the underlying issue.
    I was making a general point - did you think I meant you?
  • Chizz
    Chizz Posts: 28,338
    Chaz Hill said:

    Chizz said:

    Can anyone advise where to go to watch the civil unrest unfold?

    The frothing aneurysm Nigel Farage (“I will... don khaki, pick up a rifle and head for the front lines”) seems to be suggesting that some kind of violent disobedience will be enacted by hurt quitters whose will could be usurped by testing that will, democratically, by means of a People's Vote. But it leaves a number of questions outstanding. Like, where will this happen? Who will be taking part? To what end? And, the big one, against whom will this violence be aimed? Who will be on the receiving end?

    I am interested in how Farage - and his fellow quitters - intend for this civil unrest to be played out. Who do they intend to fight? The British police? The British Army? Remain campaigners?

    And, most interesting of all, I want to know what's going to be on their banners and in their chants. I am particularly interested in the one that will go: "What do we want?" "DEMOCRACY!" "When do we want it?" "ONLY IN 2016 AND CERTAINLY NOT SUBSEQUENTLY!"

    Does anyone know where this civil unrest is likely to take place? And is there a stream?

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/07/in-the-febrile-atmosphere-of-brexit-the-far-right-is-waiting-to-pounce?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Interesting read. The patriots are hitting the streets.
    Thanks for posting that - really interesting. There are some really horrible characters mentioned in that article, Milo, Yaxley-Lennon and Bannon at the top of the list.

    The best that can be said about EDL/DFLA marches is that the police will be able to film, monitor and control them. The great thing about this country is that you can still protest. But protest has to come with responsibility. So I will look forward to any of these "patriots" facing the full force of the law if they overstep the mark.
  • Callumcafc
    Callumcafc Posts: 63,766
    This thread can’t go one page without the usual suspects shoehorning in some questionable expose on the leader of the opposition. It’s almost like an obsession.
  • NornIrishAddick
    NornIrishAddick Posts: 9,623
    stonemuse said:

    https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6475443037630791680


    Lost amid the fevered debate on Brexit was the recent important announcement that the UK has succeeded in securing agreement at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) for its individual membership of the Government Procurement Agreement(GPA).

    This agreement, with 46 WTO member counties, will enable the UK to bid for government contracts for both goods and services in each other’s countries including the US and EU.

    This is a very significant step in the move to the UK having an independent post EU trade policy and was, with due credit, secured by the Department for International Trade against considerable opposition from several existing member countries.

    It is good news, a bit surprising that it has happened so quickly, because the USA were said to be opposed, but, then, it is led by a somewhat mercurial administration these days...
  • Henry Irving
    Henry Irving Posts: 85,225
    Callumcafc said:

    This thread can’t go one page without the usual suspects shoehorning in some questionable expose on the leader of the opposition. It’s almost like an obsession.

    key phrase there is "leader of the opposition" hence why he gets mentioned on a political thread although I agree he's not a leader and not in opposition as he actually wants Brexit more than the PM
  • IA
    IA Posts: 6,103
    I really think we can do better than a publication whose editor considered a sign aimed at reducing loutish behaviour in London as something that "could have been lifted out of Riyadh".

    We can probably also do better than the organisation that had Stephen Lennon on its payroll for a few months to get attention.
  • Sponsored links:



  • guinnessaddick
    guinnessaddick Posts: 28,633
  • stonemuse
    stonemuse Posts: 34,004
    edited December 2018
    Deleted until I am more sober
  • smudge7946
    smudge7946 Posts: 4,131
    Chizz said:

    Chaz Hill said:

    Chizz said:

    Can anyone advise where to go to watch the civil unrest unfold?

    The frothing aneurysm Nigel Farage (“I will... don khaki, pick up a rifle and head for the front lines”) seems to be suggesting that some kind of violent disobedience will be enacted by hurt quitters whose will could be usurped by testing that will, democratically, by means of a People's Vote. But it leaves a number of questions outstanding. Like, where will this happen? Who will be taking part? To what end? And, the big one, against whom will this violence be aimed? Who will be on the receiving end?

    I am interested in how Farage - and his fellow quitters - intend for this civil unrest to be played out. Who do they intend to fight? The British police? The British Army? Remain campaigners?

    And, most interesting of all, I want to know what's going to be on their banners and in their chants. I am particularly interested in the one that will go: "What do we want?" "DEMOCRACY!" "When do we want it?" "ONLY IN 2016 AND CERTAINLY NOT SUBSEQUENTLY!"

    Does anyone know where this civil unrest is likely to take place? And is there a stream?

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/07/in-the-febrile-atmosphere-of-brexit-the-far-right-is-waiting-to-pounce?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Interesting read. The patriots are hitting the streets.
    Thanks for posting that - really interesting. There are some really horrible characters mentioned in that article, Milo, Yaxley-Lennon and Bannon at the top of the list.

    The best that can be said about EDL/DFLA marches is that the police will be able to film, monitor and control them. The great thing about this country is that you can still protest. But protest has to come with responsibility. So I will look forward to any of these "patriots" facing the full force of the law if they overstep the mark.
    And obviously be protected from attacks from far left fascists.
  • micks1950
    micks1950 Posts: 943
    Henry Irving said:

    http://journal.quilliaminternational.com/2018/12/06/jews-the-british-labour-party-and-how-we-fell-out/

    @SDAddick @kentaddick

    Since you continually post this sort of thing on this thread apropos of nothing, I offer you in response the opinion of Antony Lerman Senior Fellow at the Bruno Kreisky Forum for International Dialogue, Vienna and an Honorary Fellow at the Parkes Institute for the Study of Jewish/non-Jewish Relations, Southampton University. He is also a member of the Black-Jewish Forum, a member of the Advisory Committee of the Holocaust Exhibition at the Imperial War Museum and a founding member of the Jewish Forum for Justice and Human Rights and the Independent Jewish Voices steering group. He is the author of The Making and Unmaking of a Zionist: A Personal and Political Journey:

    https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/antony-lerman/labour-should-ditch-ihra-working-definition-of-antisemitism-altogether
  • Chizz
    Chizz Posts: 28,338
    smudge7946 said:

    Chizz said:

    Chaz Hill said:

    Chizz said:

    Can anyone advise where to go to watch the civil unrest unfold?

    The frothing aneurysm Nigel Farage (“I will... don khaki, pick up a rifle and head for the front lines”) seems to be suggesting that some kind of violent disobedience will be enacted by hurt quitters whose will could be usurped by testing that will, democratically, by means of a People's Vote. But it leaves a number of questions outstanding. Like, where will this happen? Who will be taking part? To what end? And, the big one, against whom will this violence be aimed? Who will be on the receiving end?

    I am interested in how Farage - and his fellow quitters - intend for this civil unrest to be played out. Who do they intend to fight? The British police? The British Army? Remain campaigners?

    And, most interesting of all, I want to know what's going to be on their banners and in their chants. I am particularly interested in the one that will go: "What do we want?" "DEMOCRACY!" "When do we want it?" "ONLY IN 2016 AND CERTAINLY NOT SUBSEQUENTLY!"

    Does anyone know where this civil unrest is likely to take place? And is there a stream?

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/07/in-the-febrile-atmosphere-of-brexit-the-far-right-is-waiting-to-pounce?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Interesting read. The patriots are hitting the streets.
    Thanks for posting that - really interesting. There are some really horrible characters mentioned in that article, Milo, Yaxley-Lennon and Bannon at the top of the list.

    The best that can be said about EDL/DFLA marches is that the police will be able to film, monitor and control them. The great thing about this country is that you can still protest. But protest has to come with responsibility. So I will look forward to any of these "patriots" facing the full force of the law if they overstep the mark.
    And obviously be protected from attacks from far left fascists.
    Yes, obviously anyone spouting hatred, Islamophobia, homophobia, racism and hate should still be protected from being attacked wherever possible. That's the great thing about this country - even the lowest of the low deserve the protection of the police.
  • PragueAddick
    PragueAddick Posts: 22,145
    Not my tweet. Wish it was. It's already got 6,500 likes


  • Chaz Hill
    Chaz Hill Posts: 5,217
    Uncle Rup making his position clear via his Scum outlet. A second referendum without Remain as an option (because it lost in 2016)!
  • smudge7946
    smudge7946 Posts: 4,131
    Chizz said:

    smudge7946 said:

    Chizz said:

    Chaz Hill said:

    Chizz said:

    Can anyone advise where to go to watch the civil unrest unfold?

    The frothing aneurysm Nigel Farage (“I will... don khaki, pick up a rifle and head for the front lines”) seems to be suggesting that some kind of violent disobedience will be enacted by hurt quitters whose will could be usurped by testing that will, democratically, by means of a People's Vote. But it leaves a number of questions outstanding. Like, where will this happen? Who will be taking part? To what end? And, the big one, against whom will this violence be aimed? Who will be on the receiving end?

    I am interested in how Farage - and his fellow quitters - intend for this civil unrest to be played out. Who do they intend to fight? The British police? The British Army? Remain campaigners?

    And, most interesting of all, I want to know what's going to be on their banners and in their chants. I am particularly interested in the one that will go: "What do we want?" "DEMOCRACY!" "When do we want it?" "ONLY IN 2016 AND CERTAINLY NOT SUBSEQUENTLY!"

    Does anyone know where this civil unrest is likely to take place? And is there a stream?

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/07/in-the-febrile-atmosphere-of-brexit-the-far-right-is-waiting-to-pounce?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Interesting read. The patriots are hitting the streets.
    Thanks for posting that - really interesting. There are some really horrible characters mentioned in that article, Milo, Yaxley-Lennon and Bannon at the top of the list.

    The best that can be said about EDL/DFLA marches is that the police will be able to film, monitor and control them. The great thing about this country is that you can still protest. But protest has to come with responsibility. So I will look forward to any of these "patriots" facing the full force of the law if they overstep the mark.
    And obviously be protected from attacks from far left fascists.
    Yes, obviously anyone spouting hatred, Islamophobia, homophobia, racism and hate should still be protected from being attacked wherever possible. That's the great thing about this country - even the lowest of the low deserve the protection of the police.
    Absolutely. Although I'd rate child molesters as the lowest of the low.
    The great thing about this country is that people are allowed to have skewed priorities.
  • golfaddick
    golfaddick Posts: 33,628
    Chaz Hill said:

    Uncle Rup making his position clear via his Scum outlet. A second referendum without Remain as an option (because it lost in 2016)!

    Not a bad shout really. We should at least LEAVE before any 2nd vote. If not then take remain off the table & then see what the options are.
  • Fiiish
    Fiiish Posts: 7,998
    edited December 2018
    golfaddick said:

    Chaz Hill said:

    Uncle Rup making his position clear via his Scum outlet. A second referendum without Remain as an option (because it lost in 2016)!

    Not a bad shout really. We should at least LEAVE before any 2nd vote. If not then take remain off the table & then see what the options are.
    Again there is no precedent that the referendum result ought to be carried out before a confirmation vote.

    And there are also the small matters of:

    1) the electoral fraud that delivered the result
    2) it being an explicitly non-binding referendum
    3) the fact that No Deal was never discussed during the referendum and there is therefore no mandate for leaving the EU without a deal

    As usual, if the S*n are advocating 1 thing, the proper and correct thing to do would be to do the opposite, considering it's a racist Anti-British rag of bile.
  • Sponsored links:



  • seth plum
    seth plum Posts: 53,448
    golfaddick said:

    Chaz Hill said:

    Uncle Rup making his position clear via his Scum outlet. A second referendum without Remain as an option (because it lost in 2016)!

    Not a bad shout really. We should at least LEAVE before any 2nd vote. If not then take remain off the table & then see what the options are.
    Leave means sorting out the border arrangements between the UK and what it has left...doesn't it?
    Do you or anybody else have any idea about the practical arrangements for the land border on the island of Ireland?
    Without any solutions, soft or hard, then the UK won't be leaving how ever many times people say the UK should 'just or 'simply' leave or 'get on with it'.
  • Chaz Hill
    Chaz Hill Posts: 5,217
    edited December 2018
    golfaddick said:

    Chaz Hill said:

    Uncle Rup making his position clear via his Scum outlet. A second referendum without Remain as an option (because it lost in 2016)!

    Not a bad shout really. We should at least LEAVE before any 2nd vote. If not then take remain off the table & then see what the options are.
    I’m not entirely sure Mr Murdoch has the best interests of the British working classes in mind when offering advice.
  • Henry Irving
    Henry Irving Posts: 85,225






  • kentaddick
    kentaddick Posts: 18,729
    Callumcafc said:

    This thread can’t go one page without the usual suspects shoehorning in some questionable expose on the leader of the opposition. It’s almost like an obsession.

    The irony when it’s the usual suspects jumping to the defence of dear leader, compounded by the additional irony of attacking authorship of the articles on moral grounds when the article explains Corbynites have a misplaced moral superiority.

    Also I don’t think being a bit of a spoilt twat in Toby Young’s case compares with shaking hands with people who murder Jews for being Jewish, then throwing his arms up in the air saying he has nothing to do with rising anti semitism and then claiming a genocide didn’t happen because he hadn’t supported military action at the time (which saved countless lives, including two friends of mine).

    That’s on top of his utterly rudderless leadership on brexit (if you’re really going to be pedantic about keeping the thread on subject)
  • kentaddick
    kentaddick Posts: 18,729
    MuttleyCAFC said:

    Good luck to them, as long as there are people stupid enough to seek them out and quote from them, it is justified.

    Considering on the now locked and sunk anti semitism thread it was you that raised and justified the Rothschild conspiracy theory, I don’t think you really can throw stones on people believing “stupid” stories.
  • Henry Irving
    Henry Irving Posts: 85,225
    kentaddick said:

    MuttleyCAFC said:

    Good luck to them, as long as there are people stupid enough to seek them out and quote from them, it is justified.

    Considering on the now locked and sunk anti semitism thread it was you that raised and justified the Rothschild conspiracy theory, I don’t think you really can throw stones on people believing “stupid” stories.
    Missed that. Did mutley really justify a racist trope about the Rothschilds first used by the far right and now used frequently by those on the left of the Labour party?
  • Stu_of_Kunming
    Stu_of_Kunming Posts: 17,118
    Henry Irving said:

    kentaddick said:

    MuttleyCAFC said:

    Good luck to them, as long as there are people stupid enough to seek them out and quote from them, it is justified.

    Considering on the now locked and sunk anti semitism thread it was you that raised and justified the Rothschild conspiracy theory, I don’t think you really can throw stones on people believing “stupid” stories.
    Missed that. Did mutley really justify a racist trope about the Rothschilds first used by the far right and now used frequently by those on the left of the Labour party?
    Yes.
  • PragueAddick
    PragueAddick Posts: 22,145
    Back on topic chaps. How about considering more closely what that IMHO rather fit Norwegian politician had to say about the Norway option. I ran that video just before I heard Amber Rudd going on R4 to advocate "Norway plus", seemingly unaware that Norway and any other EFTA member could just veto it. Actually I remember Norwegians pointing it out way back during the referendum campaign. Its a classic example of the UK charging around Europe demanding this and that, with not a smidgin of awareness of what the other affected parties may think of our ideas.

    If she represents mainstream Norwegian political thinking, the Norway option is dead in the water, even as a load of English politicians lumber around to fasten on it as a way out of the mess.
  • Chaz Hill
    Chaz Hill Posts: 5,217
    PragueAddick said:

    Back on topic chaps. How about considering more closely what that IMHO rather fit Norwegian politician had to say about the Norway option. I ran that video just before I heard Amber Rudd going on R4 to advocate "Norway plus", seemingly unaware that Norway and any other EFTA member could just veto it. Actually I remember Norwegians pointing it out way back during the referendum campaign. Its a classic example of the UK charging around Europe demanding this and that, with not a smidgin of awareness of what the other affected parties may think of our ideas.

    If she represents mainstream Norwegian political thinking, the Norway option is dead in the water, even as a load of English politicians lumber around to fasten on it as a way out of the mess.

    Somebody in the TV piece last night mentioned a problem is the English fixation with “self” which makes it difficult for other structures to welcome our membership.
  • se9addick
    se9addick Posts: 32,037
    edited December 2018
    PragueAddick said:

    Back on topic chaps. How about considering more closely what that IMHO rather fit Norwegian politician had to say about the Norway option. I ran that video just before I heard Amber Rudd going on R4 to advocate "Norway plus", seemingly unaware that Norway and any other EFTA member could just veto it. Actually I remember Norwegians pointing it out way back during the referendum campaign. Its a classic example of the UK charging around Europe demanding this and that, with not a smidgin of awareness of what the other affected parties may think of our ideas.

    If she represents mainstream Norwegian political thinking, the Norway option is dead in the water, even as a load of English politicians lumber around to fasten on it as a way out of the mess.

    I think if you cut through the emotion, which you should always do when you consider someones opinion, then what she is saying is reasonable.

    Britain is enormous compared to the nations in EFTA. Norway probably feels like the dominant member but clearly if the U.K. joined London would feel entitled to call the shots and, given that huge swathes of our nation are opposed to central planks of EFTAs being (not least accepting the four freedoms in exchange for access to the EUs single market), those fears are not unfounded.

    The Norway model, as I have said frequently on this thread, is the best way out of this mess (but not as good as what we have) but we wouldn’t just waltz in, we would need to demonstrate that we can play by the rules if we want to join the club. We should also make the positive case for accepting the U.K. Hextupling the size of the bloc should bring some balance to the relationship they have with the EU (which I understand is rather one sided) as well increasing clout in trade negotiation with 3rd nations. There would be additional soft benefits (related to the UK’s diplomatic presence globally, security cooperation and the status of the U.K. as a coastal nation in common with Iceland and Norway- might not help Lichtenstein or Switzerland too much!).
This discussion has been closed.

Categories

“Marketplace”