the demise of democracy in the United Kingdom

[747]

Instead of arguing about Brexit, why not (for a change) take a close look at the current state of the EU and try to work out what the future holds for it.

 

There is unrest in numerous member States (for a variety of reasons) and the EU leaders are doing a rerun of the 'Nero attitude' to unrest in the Camp.

 

It is correct to say that both major British Political Parties are a complete shambles ..... but they will change if they realise that it will prevent them from being elected ..... and there we have it in a nutshell .... that is the difference between the UK and the EU. It is called Demoocracy.

[Bulletguy]

ageingandrew - 2019-02-16 5:09 PM

 

Bulletguy - 2019-02-15 4:02 PM

 

ageingandrew - 2019-02-15 11:36 AM

 

HarveyHeaven - 2019-02-12 9:13 AM

 

pelmetman - 2019-02-09 1:29 PM

 

HarveyHeaven - 2019-02-08 11:20 AM

 

Brexit is wrong it was won illegally promoted by a totally right wing press and Tory owned BBC...it is not possible to have considered discussion in relation to Brexit...where do you start....it was fraudulent and nothing can change that, it was won illegally.... the UK Government is corrupt .....the UK is fast becomming a dictatorship and the future is bleak...whatever the outcome of this particular corrupt event the UK will never be the same again. We know those who voted Brexit were lied to but sadly they know it now too but still support the corruption. Treaties and responsibilities are being broken without a thought for the consequences. The Tory Government are happily passing laws which result in the deaths of thousands of people in utter misery, poverty is rife....Victorian diseases realted to poverty have returned to the UK...homelessness is at an all time high with people in wheelchairs being made homeless and dying on the streets, the NHS is being totally destroyed to justify selling it off, hundreds of thousands of children are now living in poverty and temporary accommodation relying on food banks to stave off starvation, but the right wing press and the BBC remain stum......Democracy is dead and will remain so until some level honour is restored aided and a betted by an impartial media who will report the true state of affairs the country is now in.

 

Get over it *-) ...........

 

We were lied to 40 odd years ago when we were told we could join a Common Market >:-) .........

 

 

The Electoral Commission found the Leave Campaign guilty of electoral fraud in 2016 and subject ot foreign interference..... NOTHING will change that....a democracy would have immediately declared the Referendum void and re-run it without delay ensuring there was no fraud and no foreign interference...these are facts....whist this remains the case the UK cannot be described as a Democracy and Democracy will not be restored until this fraudulent situation has been addressed........I cannot recall the Referendum of 40 years ago being officially found to be fraudulent!!

 

Not so and completely wrong. The Electoral commission did not find the Leave campaign guilty of electoral fraud. The electoral commission found them guilty of exceeding spending limits but then admitted that they themselves (the electoral commission) had misinterpreted their own spending rules.

 

There is no evidence of foreign interference highlighted anywhere in the election commission reports so how you can make such sweeping statements with no evidence is beyond me. As for the rest of this diatribe; un-substantiated nonsense; of utter crap; inane bitching; I really don't know why I have bothered to respond to it.....

 

But I did.

 

It makes me wonder whether the 'Remainiacs' would have bitched so much if 'Remain' had won.

Vote Leave and BeLeave were running funding through different accounts, similar to money laundering if you like, and BeLeave spent more than £675,000 with Aggregate IQ under a common plan with Vote Leave. Aggregate IQ is a Canadian company so there's your evidence of 'foreign interference' straight away, part of which was the web intertwined through Cambridge Analytica and SCL.

 

False declarations were made and that's electoral fraud. You really should have a listen to Chris Whylie's testimony to MP's. Don't be fooled by his outward appearance, that guy worked with CA as a data consultant and is extremely articulate and intelligent.

 

I'm amazed anyone can still bury their heads over this as the evidence has long been out in the public domain that the Leave campaign actions were a subversion of democracy and quite how anyone can be comfortable with that, i've no idea. As with most Brexiteers you mention "the win" which sadly, appears to be of more importance than valuing and ensuring lawful democracy.

 

Aggregate IQ/Cambridge Analytics supplied a data analytics service to the Leave campaign, you cannot make a claim of “foreign interference” just because they are based in Canada. They were contracted to provide a service for the legitimate Leave campaign. They provided targeted audience analysis and targeted messaging for the legitimate Leave campaign; a far less intrusive messaging campaign than the Government’s which was paid for with tax payers funds when they sent every household in the UK a blatant piece of pro-EU propaganda advising us to vote to remain.

 

No-one is burying their heads, we can all see what happened and see the dirty tricks used by both sides during the referendum campaign including the “punishment budget” we were all threatened with, the loss of 50,000 jobs straight away and many, many more vile threats designed to browbeat us and frighten us to vote to remain.

 

Just because you believe fraud was committed does not make it a fact. The electoral commission does not recognise electoral fraud as having happened. The law broken by Leave was to exceed their spending limit, a limit that the electoral commission themselves had misinterpreted, and inaccuracies in reporting.

 

So many clearly want to believe that “we was robbed”; that democracy has been subverted. Neither of these things are true. In 2016 the UK held its greatest democratic exercise for more than 40 years. More people voted in the referendum than in pretty much any election in the past 40 years. Just because you don’t get what you want does not mean that democracy has been subverted.

 

The only subversion of democracy will be the UK not leaving the EU as voted on by the majority of UK voters.

I suggest you hear out what Chris Wylie had to say who worked for Cambridge Analytica and gave a very thorough insight into the web CA was involved in which was far reaching. If you don't want to sit through the testimony he gave to the DCMS committee hearing then at least have a listen to a shorter interview he gave to C4 news.

 

 

Also Shahmir Sanni, a Brexit campaign worker who witnessed first hand the cheating involved and diversion of fundings. He reported the matter to the EC......and ended up with his sexuality being publicly "outed" by Stephen Parkinson, May's political secretary at the time. Parkinson denied "outing" Sanni but Parkinson’s words sparked condemnation from former Vote Leave staffers with one saying, “I’ve lost complete respect for Stephen Parkinson. His antics are inexcusable and my sympathies are with Shahmir Sanni.” Downing street refused to comment.

 

 

The subversion of democracy is crystal clear to me in that we all know the referendum was not run or conducted in accordance to electoral law. Whilst some acknowledge that fact, others prefer to remain in a permanent state of denial. I'm fully aware of dodgy dealings and electoral interference in other countries, mainly third world and/or regimes with dictatorships, so never imagined such could ever become possible in this country and find it extremely difficult witnessing the catastrophic damage it's done and continuing to do. The lies and disinformation used to push the Brexit agenda are all well documented and cannot be ignored. Even had i voted Brexit, i personally would not be comfortable with all the duplicity and shenanigans on my conscience. You obviously are but the consequences of your actions will certainly come back to haunt you though i suspect it won't bother you until it affects you personally. I look beyond that and see other peoples livelihoods being impacted because this isn't about me....it's about the future and welfare of others, those less well off, those facing uncertainty over their jobs just to name a few points.

[malc d]

747 - 2019-02-16 7:16 PM

 

 

 

It is correct to say that both major British Political Parties are a complete shambles ..... but they will change if they realise that it will prevent them from being elected ..... and there we have it in a nutshell .... that is the difference between the UK and the EU.

 

 

It is called Demoocracy.

 

 

I would suggest that the UK is only seen as democratic by people who vote Labour or Tory.

 

Try voting for anyone else and see how much representation you get in Westminster.

 

;-)

[747]

malc d - 2019-02-16 7:46 PM

 

747 - 2019-02-16 7:16 PM

 

 

 

It is correct to say that both major British Political Parties are a complete shambles ..... but they will change if they realise that it will prevent them from being elected ..... and there we have it in a nutshell .... that is the difference between the UK and the EU.

 

 

It is called Demoocracy.

 

 

I would suggest that the UK is only seen as democratic by people who vote Labour or Tory.

 

Try voting for anyone else and see how much representation you get in Westminster.

 

;-)

 

It is not perfect but far better than Communism or Fascism.

 

While on the subject of Fascism, it would seem that Britain has many Fascist supporters ..... albeit not knowing that they are supporters of Fascism because they have been duped.

 

They are pro EU and it seems that the notion of an EU was first discussed in Berlin in 1942. I don't need to remind you who was in power in Germany in 1942 and who had plans for a Europe controlled by one entity (actually it was two because Italy was also to have a say in running Europe).

 

Here is a copy of the first EU planning document, translated into English. It is a long document but makes interesting reading.

 

http://www.bilderberg.org/EWG.pdf

 

It now appears that our rampant Socialists on here are actually rampant something else Mein Herr. *-)

[Guest pelmetman]

Brian Kirby - 2019-02-16 2:41 PM

 

Tracker - 2019-02-14 4:43 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2019-02-14 4:35 PM

 

pelmetman - 2019-02-14 8:56 AM...…………………...How much would you like to bet that I wasn't on HMS Devonshire when she visited Odessa in Russia in 1976 ?

Er, its in Ukraine, Dave. Not another of those embarrassing navy lark errors, surely! :-D

 

I doubt the Russians saw it that way Brian?

 

Left hand down a bit!

Yes, but I bet the Ukrainians did! It'd be like telling a Welshman that Wales is part of England, wouldn't it? I'll get me own coat! :-D

 

(Daily Telegraph May 24th 1976.)

The Guided Missile Destroyer HMS Devonshire, which sailed yesterday from Malta for Odessa on the first Royal Naval visit to a ***Russian port*** in ten years, will in one sense be carrying on where she left off.

It was the Devonshire which made the last visit to a ***Russian port.*** This was to Leningrad with Admiral Sir John Frewen.

The latest visit – which is timed to begin at the same moment as the Soviet Cruiser Obraztsovy arrives in Portsmouth on Friday – was arranged by Mr Callaghan and Mr Gromyko in March.

The Devonshire will fly the flag of Admiral Anthony Morton, Flag Officer of the First Flotilla, who as a junior officer took part in convoys to Mumansk.

 

As I said Brian ;-) ..........

 

In 1976 the USSR was commonly known as RUSSIA...... even the Daily Telegraph thought so :D ...........

 

 

[Guest pelmetman]

Brian Kirby - 2019-02-16 5:34 PM

 

In effect, leave voted against the EU, while remain voted for future prosperity.

 

 

Rubbish........You voted for the status quo *-) ........

 

I cant see much future prosperity from the EU seeing as our exports to them have dropped every year for the last 9 years ;-) ...........

 

If we want to properly prosper we need to get rid of expensive overheads like the EU >:-) ..........

 

 

[Fast Pat]

747 - 2019-02-16 7:56 PM

 

It is not perfect but far better than Communism or Fasc

 

While on the subject of Fascism, it would seem that Britain has many Fascist supporters ..... albeit not knowing that they are supporters of Fascism because they have been duped.

 

They are pro EU and it seems that the notion of an EU was first discussed in Berlin in 1942. I don't need to remind you who was in power in Germany in 1942 and who had plans for a Europe controlled by one entity (actually it was two because Italy was also to have a say in running Europe).

 

Here is a copy of the first EU planning document, translated into English. It is a long document but makes interesting reading.

 

http://www.bilderberg.org/EWG.pdf

 

It now appears that our rampant Socialists on here are actually rampant something else Mein Herr. *-)

 

Ah that old myth?

 

Given the profound differences between a Nazi-occupied Europe and the European Union, how do we explain the enduring appeal of this comparison?

 

First of all, it is a simple expression of anxiety about a thriving Germany being the strongest economic and political power in Europe. In much of southern Europe, associating Angela Merkel’s calls for unpopular austerity measures, particularly in Greece, with Nazi dictates is a convenient way to attempt to discredit the policies. Taking the historical example of German dominance of Europe under Hitler and likening it to the economic and political clout of Germany today is easy, but ultimately unhelpful. It should be remembered that European integration began as a French initiative meant in part to strengthen France’s place in the world by harnessing the German economy, thus lending greater volume to France’s voice on the international stage. The fact that Germany has displaced France as the largest economic and political force in Europe is more a testament to the flexibility of the structure of the EU.

 

The enduring appeal of this myth in Britain is in large part due to that fact that it plays on public perceptions of the country’s experience in the Second World War. Talk of Hitler harks back to Britain’s finest hour, when Britain, so the national narrative goes, was able to defeat the Nazis that had overrun Britain’s continental allies, thanks to the strength of Britain’s national character, its empire, and its special relationship with the US. This rhetorical flourish concludes that today Britain ought to stand outside of Europe, as it did during the Second World War, and is accompanied by appeals to the “special relationship” – and even the Commonwealth – to prop up Britain’s power.

 

Such proposals are anachronistic and unrealistic. While its empire and its navy once gave Britain the status of a superpower, the political reality today is that Britain’s voice on the international stage is significantly amplified by its mambership of the EU. Labelling the EU as the fruit of Nazi projects may be a roundabout way of stoking up national pride, but the actual desired outcome – opposing the EU from the outside – would be disastrous for Britain.

 

There are indeed many legitimate grounds for criticising the EU. The EU’s policies since the eruption of the Eurozone crisis have often lacked vision and have weakened support for the EU in many member states. There is a troubling disconnect between the seemingly distant and arcane institutions of the EU and the everyday concerns of its 500 million citizens.

 

Even some of the historical assertions meant to legitimise the EU are questionable – the EU’s claim to have prevented war in Europe since 1945 consciously ignores the decisive role played by the superpowers and the context of the Cold War.

 

Nevertheless, the suggestion that today’s EU is in any way modelled on Nazi plans for Europe, or indeed that the Nazis had any plans for the continent resembling today’s EU, is fallacious and misleading. Instead of blaming the EU’s problems on some nebulous link to a Nazi past, the debate should instead focus constructively on how to solve the existing problems facing the EU and its member states – without resorting to labelling one's opponents as Nazis.

[Guest pelmetman]

malc d - 2019-02-16 7:46 PM

 

747 - 2019-02-16 7:16 PM

 

 

 

It is correct to say that both major British Political Parties are a complete shambles ..... but they will change if they realise that it will prevent them from being elected ..... and there we have it in a nutshell .... that is the difference between the UK and the EU.

 

 

It is called Demoocracy.

 

 

I would suggest that the UK is only seen as democratic by people who vote Labour or Tory.

 

Try voting for anyone else and see how much representation you get in Westminster.

 

;-)

 

I dunno.............I reckon us UKIP voters managed to get Cameron to have the referendum B-) .........

 

 

 

 

[Bulletguy]

747 - 2019-02-16 7:56 PM

 

malc d - 2019-02-16 7:46 PM

 

747 - 2019-02-16 7:16 PM

 

 

 

It is correct to say that both major British Political Parties are a complete shambles ..... but they will change if they realise that it will prevent them from being elected ..... and there we have it in a nutshell .... that is the difference between the UK and the EU.

 

 

It is called Demoocracy.

 

 

I would suggest that the UK is only seen as democratic by people who vote Labour or Tory.

 

Try voting for anyone else and see how much representation you get in Westminster.

 

;-)

 

It is not perfect but far better than Communism or Fascism.

 

While on the subject of Fascism, it would seem that Britain has many Fascist supporters ..... albeit not knowing that they are supporters of Fascism because they have been duped.

 

They are pro EU and it seems that the notion of an EU was first discussed in Berlin in 1942. I don't need to remind you who was in power in Germany in 1942 and who had plans for a Europe controlled by one entity (actually it was two because Italy was also to have a say in running Europe).

 

Here is a copy of the first EU planning document, translated into English. It is a long document but makes interesting reading.

 

http://www.bilderberg.org/EWG.pdf

 

It now appears that our rampant Socialists on here are actually rampant something else Mein Herr.

Lol that old chestnut.....when all else fails, invoke Godwins law! The sure sign of rabid anti-EU pro-Brexiteers who have tried this on others forums. You'd best get up to speed and read this;

 

https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/lucandr%C3%A9-brunet/is-eu-nazi-project-debunking-enduring-myth

 

Just seen FP already quoted. ;-)

[Guest pelmetman]

Bulletguy - 2019-02-16 8:46 PM

 

747 - 2019-02-16 7:56 PM

 

malc d - 2019-02-16 7:46 PM

 

747 - 2019-02-16 7:16 PM

 

 

 

It is correct to say that both major British Political Parties are a complete shambles ..... but they will change if they realise that it will prevent them from being elected ..... and there we have it in a nutshell .... that is the difference between the UK and the EU.

 

 

It is called Demoocracy.

 

 

I would suggest that the UK is only seen as democratic by people who vote Labour or Tory.

 

Try voting for anyone else and see how much representation you get in Westminster.

 

;-)

 

It is not perfect but far better than Communism or Fascism.

 

While on the subject of Fascism, it would seem that Britain has many Fascist supporters ..... albeit not knowing that they are supporters of Fascism because they have been duped.

 

They are pro EU and it seems that the notion of an EU was first discussed in Berlin in 1942. I don't need to remind you who was in power in Germany in 1942 and who had plans for a Europe controlled by one entity (actually it was two because Italy was also to have a say in running Europe).

 

Here is a copy of the first EU planning document, translated into English. It is a long document but makes interesting reading.

 

http://www.bilderberg.org/EWG.pdf

 

It now appears that our rampant Socialists on here are actually rampant something else Mein Herr.

Lol that old chestnut.....when all else fails, invoke Godwins law! The sure sign of rabid anti-EU pro-Brexiteers who have tried this on others forums. You'd best get up to speed and read this;

 

https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/lucandr%C3%A9-brunet/is-eu-nazi-project-debunking-enduring-myth

 

Just seen FP already quoted. ;-)

 

The German European agenda is the same........Its only the method that has changed ;-) ........

 

It's pretty obvious the EU and the Euro are there for the benefit of one nation *-) .........

 

 

[Bulletguy]

pelmetman - 2019-02-16 9:07 PM

 

Bulletguy - 2019-02-16 8:46 PM

 

747 - 2019-02-16 7:56 PM

 

malc d - 2019-02-16 7:46 PM

 

747 - 2019-02-16 7:16 PM

 

 

 

It is correct to say that both major British Political Parties are a complete shambles ..... but they will change if they realise that it will prevent them from being elected ..... and there we have it in a nutshell .... that is the difference between the UK and the EU.

 

 

It is called Demoocracy.

 

 

I would suggest that the UK is only seen as democratic by people who vote Labour or Tory.

 

Try voting for anyone else and see how much representation you get in Westminster.

 

;-)

 

It is not perfect but far better than Communism or Fascism.

 

While on the subject of Fascism, it would seem that Britain has many Fascist supporters ..... albeit not knowing that they are supporters of Fascism because they have been duped.

 

They are pro EU and it seems that the notion of an EU was first discussed in Berlin in 1942. I don't need to remind you who was in power in Germany in 1942 and who had plans for a Europe controlled by one entity (actually it was two because Italy was also to have a say in running Europe).

 

Here is a copy of the first EU planning document, translated into English. It is a long document but makes interesting reading.

 

http://www.bilderberg.org/EWG.pdf

 

It now appears that our rampant Socialists on here are actually rampant something else Mein Herr.

Lol that old chestnut.....when all else fails, invoke Godwins law! The sure sign of rabid anti-EU pro-Brexiteers who have tried this on others forums. You'd best get up to speed and read this;

 

https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/lucandr%C3%A9-brunet/is-eu-nazi-project-debunking-enduring-myth

 

Just seen FP already quoted. ;-)

 

The German European agenda is the same........Its only the method that has changed ;-) ........

 

It's pretty obvious the EU and the Euro are there for the benefit of one nation *-) .........

Is that the best you can counter with.....a couple of tweet like assumptions with zero factual evidence? At least i'd expect to read a few paragraphs. Put a bit more effort into your bleating. :-|

[Guest pelmetman]

Bulletguy - 2019-02-16 9:21 PM

 

pelmetman - 2019-02-16 9:07 PM

 

Bulletguy - 2019-02-16 8:46 PM

 

747 - 2019-02-16 7:56 PM

 

malc d - 2019-02-16 7:46 PM

 

747 - 2019-02-16 7:16 PM

 

 

 

It is correct to say that both major British Political Parties are a complete shambles ..... but they will change if they realise that it will prevent them from being elected ..... and there we have it in a nutshell .... that is the difference between the UK and the EU.

 

 

It is called Demoocracy.

 

 

I would suggest that the UK is only seen as democratic by people who vote Labour or Tory.

 

Try voting for anyone else and see how much representation you get in Westminster.

 

;-)

 

It is not perfect but far better than Communism or Fascism.

 

While on the subject of Fascism, it would seem that Britain has many Fascist supporters ..... albeit not knowing that they are supporters of Fascism because they have been duped.

 

They are pro EU and it seems that the notion of an EU was first discussed in Berlin in 1942. I don't need to remind you who was in power in Germany in 1942 and who had plans for a Europe controlled by one entity (actually it was two because Italy was also to have a say in running Europe).

 

Here is a copy of the first EU planning document, translated into English. It is a long document but makes interesting reading.

 

http://www.bilderberg.org/EWG.pdf

 

It now appears that our rampant Socialists on here are actually rampant something else Mein Herr.

Lol that old chestnut.....when all else fails, invoke Godwins law! The sure sign of rabid anti-EU pro-Brexiteers who have tried this on others forums. You'd best get up to speed and read this;

 

https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/lucandr%C3%A9-brunet/is-eu-nazi-project-debunking-enduring-myth

 

Just seen FP already quoted. ;-)

 

The German European agenda is the same........Its only the method that has changed ;-) ........

 

It's pretty obvious the EU and the Euro are there for the benefit of one nation *-) .........

Is that the best you can counter with.....a couple of tweet like assumptions with zero factual evidence? At least i'd expect to read a few paragraphs. Put a bit more effort into your bleating. :-|

 

"A number of EU countries already grumble about Germany’s growing dominance."

 

https://www.politico.eu/article/what-germany-wants-angela-merkel-european-commission-presidency/

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jun/06/fix-eu-single-currency-does-not-work

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/922404/german-power-grab-eu-martin-selmayr-european-commission-brexit

 

.........perhaps you should try taking your EU blinkers off ;-) ........

 

 

[Bulletguy]

pelmetman - 2019-02-16 9:42 PM

 

Bulletguy - 2019-02-16 9:21 PM

 

pelmetman - 2019-02-16 9:07 PM

 

Bulletguy - 2019-02-16 8:46 PM

 

747 - 2019-02-16 7:56 PM

 

malc d - 2019-02-16 7:46 PM

 

747 - 2019-02-16 7:16 PM

 

 

 

It is correct to say that both major British Political Parties are a complete shambles ..... but they will change if they realise that it will prevent them from being elected ..... and there we have it in a nutshell .... that is the difference between the UK and the EU.

 

 

It is called Demoocracy.

 

 

I would suggest that the UK is only seen as democratic by people who vote Labour or Tory.

 

Try voting for anyone else and see how much representation you get in Westminster.

 

;-)

 

It is not perfect but far better than Communism or Fascism.

 

While on the subject of Fascism, it would seem that Britain has many Fascist supporters ..... albeit not knowing that they are supporters of Fascism because they have been duped.

 

They are pro EU and it seems that the notion of an EU was first discussed in Berlin in 1942. I don't need to remind you who was in power in Germany in 1942 and who had plans for a Europe controlled by one entity (actually it was two because Italy was also to have a say in running Europe).

 

Here is a copy of the first EU planning document, translated into English. It is a long document but makes interesting reading.

 

http://www.bilderberg.org/EWG.pdf

 

It now appears that our rampant Socialists on here are actually rampant something else Mein Herr.

Lol that old chestnut.....when all else fails, invoke Godwins law! The sure sign of rabid anti-EU pro-Brexiteers who have tried this on others forums. You'd best get up to speed and read this;

 

https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/lucandr%C3%A9-brunet/is-eu-nazi-project-debunking-enduring-myth

 

Just seen FP already quoted. ;-)

 

The German European agenda is the same........Its only the method that has changed ;-) ........

 

It's pretty obvious the EU and the Euro are there for the benefit of one nation *-) .........

Is that the best you can counter with.....a couple of tweet like assumptions with zero factual evidence? At least i'd expect to read a few paragraphs. Put a bit more effort into your bleating. :-|

 

"A number of EU countries already grumble about Germany’s growing dominance."

.........perhaps you should try taking your EU blinkers off ;-) ........

Germany is the largest contributor to EU funding of all 28 members. UK has benefited from huge amounts of EU funding you now want to end, including that of vital medical research which is utterly disgraceful. You lot should be forced to pay for that alone through the most punitive taxation possible and for sure, those who've sought to drag us into this unholy mess must now be held to account for their actions.

 

Whilst we Remain voters recognise the EU is not 100% perfection (what organisation is?), at least by having a seat at the table we had a voice. We also knew where we were as an EU member state. Brexiters never had an exit strategy and had no clue at all what to do or where they were going after the referendum....in fact those who'd shouted loudly about it, all ran off.

 

So far your lunacy has cost the UK £80 billion......£800 million a week every week with an economy you claim as "ticking over nicely" *-) plunging to a loss of 2% GDP.

[Guest pelmetman]

Bulletguy - 2019-02-16 10:54 PM

 

UK has benefited from huge amounts of EU funding

 

 

More FAKE NEWS *-) ..............

 

The UK has received a little bit of OUR MONEY back >:-) .............

 

 

[Guest pelmetman]

Bulletguy - 2019-02-16 10:54 PM

 

So far your lunacy has cost the UK £80 billion......£800 million a week every week with an economy you claim as "ticking over nicely" *-) plunging to a loss of 2% GDP.

 

Germany's GDP dropped from 2.2% in 2017 to 1.5% in 2018

 

Britain's GDP dropped from 1.8% in 2017 to 1.4% in 2018

 

So if a loss of 2% of GDP is plunging?....... What would you call Germany's?..........

 

Bombing? >:-) .......

 

 

 

 

[Brian Kirby]

pelmetman - 2019-02-16 8:19 PM.........…..In 1976 the USSR was commonly known as RUSSIA...... even the Daily Telegraph thought so :D ...........

To which there is an eminently simple answer: the Telegraph was wrong.

 

Russia and the USSR were not the same thing, and Ukraine, as I pointed out above was, at that time, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.

 

All the Telegraph did was dumb-down the distinction, to assist its average cold war era reader.

 

Had you been on the Leningrad (now once more St Petersberg) trip in October 1966, you would have been to Russia, but you were on the Odessa trip, and you actually went to Ukraine (then the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic), which was part of the Soviet block, but not part of Russia.

 

Claiming Ukraine was, or ever has been, part of Russia, is just geographic illiteracy.

[Brian Kirby]

Fast Pat - 2019-02-16 8:28 PM

 

747 - 2019-02-16 7:56 PM

 

It is not perfect but far better than Communism or Fasc

 

While on the subject of Fascism, it would seem that Britain has many Fascist supporters ..... albeit not knowing that they are supporters of Fascism because they have been duped.

 

They are pro EU and it seems that the notion of an EU was first discussed in Berlin in 1942. I don't need to remind you who was in power in Germany in 1942 and who had plans for a Europe controlled by one entity (actually it was two because Italy was also to have a say in running Europe).

 

Here is a copy of the first EU planning document, translated into English. It is a long document but makes interesting reading.

 

http://www.bilderberg.org/EWG.pdf

 

It now appears that our rampant Socialists on here are actually rampant something else Mein Herr. *-)

 

Ah that old myth?

 

Given the profound differences between a Nazi-occupied Europe and the European Union, how do we explain the enduring appeal of this comparison?

 

First of all, it is a simple expression of anxiety about a thriving Germany being the strongest economic and political power in Europe. In much of southern Europe, associating Angela Merkel’s calls for unpopular austerity measures, particularly in Greece, with Nazi dictates is a convenient way to attempt to discredit the policies. Taking the historical example of German dominance of Europe under Hitler and likening it to the economic and political clout of Germany today is easy, but ultimately unhelpful. It should be remembered that European integration began as a French initiative meant in part to strengthen France’s place in the world by harnessing the German economy, thus lending greater volume to France’s voice on the international stage. The fact that Germany has displaced France as the largest economic and political force in Europe is more a testament to the flexibility of the structure of the EU.

 

The enduring appeal of this myth in Britain is in large part due to that fact that it plays on public perceptions of the country’s experience in the Second World War. Talk of Hitler harks back to Britain’s finest hour, when Britain, so the national narrative goes, was able to defeat the Nazis that had overrun Britain’s continental allies, thanks to the strength of Britain’s national character, its empire, and its special relationship with the US. This rhetorical flourish concludes that today Britain ought to stand outside of Europe, as it did during the Second World War, and is accompanied by appeals to the “special relationship” – and even the Commonwealth – to prop up Britain’s power.

 

Such proposals are anachronistic and unrealistic. While its empire and its navy once gave Britain the status of a superpower, the political reality today is that Britain’s voice on the international stage is significantly amplified by its mambership of the EU. Labelling the EU as the fruit of Nazi projects may be a roundabout way of stoking up national pride, but the actual desired outcome – opposing the EU from the outside – would be disastrous for Britain.

 

There are indeed many legitimate grounds for criticising the EU. The EU’s policies since the eruption of the Eurozone crisis have often lacked vision and have weakened support for the EU in many member states. There is a troubling disconnect between the seemingly distant and arcane institutions of the EU and the everyday concerns of its 500 million citizens.

 

Even some of the historical assertions meant to legitimise the EU are questionable – the EU’s claim to have prevented war in Europe since 1945 consciously ignores the decisive role played by the superpowers and the context of the Cold War.

 

Nevertheless, the suggestion that today’s EU is in any way modelled on Nazi plans for Europe, or indeed that the Nazis had any plans for the continent resembling today’s EU, is fallacious and misleading. Instead of blaming the EU’s problems on some nebulous link to a Nazi past, the debate should instead focus constructively on how to solve the existing problems facing the EU and its member states – without resorting to labelling one's opponents as Nazis.

Apologies for repeating the whole lot just to say good post, but it needs the lot for context. Spot on!

[Brian Kirby]

pelmetman - 2019-02-16 8:27 PM

Brian Kirby - 2019-02-16 5:34 PM

In effect, leave voted against the EU, while remain voted for future prosperity.

Rubbish........You voted for the status quo *-) ........

I cant see much future prosperity from the EU seeing as our exports to them have dropped every year for the last 9 years ;-) ...........

If we want to properly prosper we need to get rid of expensive overheads like the EU >:-) ..........

But you forger Dave, that the status quo extends into future.

 

Neither you, nor any other proponents of Brexit have ever, to my knowledge, explained what the post Brexit future of the UK would be.

 

You and the other Brexiters voted against the flawed image you have gained from the sources you choose to read and believe.

 

Compered to what we have now, what would we lose were we to remain the EU, and what actual benefits will leaving now bring? Where are the imperatives? Why the rush? Why now?

[ageingandrew]

Brian Kirby - 2019-02-16 5:34 PM

So here's the thing. Brexit is hopelessly mired. It is clear that parliament has no majority for any solution to the referendum vote outcome. Therefore, what are the options?

 

A slim majority of the electorate voted to leave. A substantial minority voted remain.

 

Those who voted leave voted on the basis of a number of issues, principally national sovereignty, immigration, and border security.

 

Those who voted remain did so mainly on the basis of the damage to the UK economy that Brexit seemed most likely to cause.

 

In effect, leave voted against the EU, while remain voted for future prosperity.

 

...

Brexit is not fundamentally about the EU, it is about years of failed UK government policy. Bin Brexit and fix the UK. Good slogan? :-D

 

Hello Brian,

 

Brexit is mired because of Parliament wanting to obstruct instead of construct and a PM who is not capable of working in a cooperative manner. This is evidenced by the dreadful deal she directed her negotiating team to bring back to us, a deal that can only be described as an unconditional surrender; a deal that was properly rejected by the Commons.

David Cameron tried to get us a better deal throughout 2014/15, but he failed. At the time the UK was soaking up a lot of EU unemployment from Spain, Greece, Italy, Romania, Bulgaria and France and of course those countries did not want their citizens to be denied access to the UK jobs market so refused him permission to ‘control our own borders’. This was a clear demonstration of how much sovereignty we had lost over the decades and that the EU was incapable of reform.

 

We had a referendum because it was generally accepted that Parliament was not representative of the people. The referendum result proved that to be true.

 

I totally disagree with your statement that “remain voters voted mainly on the basis of the damage to the UK economy that Brexit seemed most likely to cause”. I believe that remain voters voted against leave, against the buffoon Johnson, against Gove and others.

The remain campaign failed miserably to paint a compelling picture or vision of why the UK should remain in the EU and that is why they lost.

 

However, we are where we are. Yes, Brexit is about years of failed UK government policy, but UK government policy will not be fixed by staying in the EU.

 

Extending article 50 or holding a further referendum would be admissions that democracy will be subverted by Remain who will continue to sow fear, uncertainty, doubt and hyperbole in order to scare citizens into voting their way.

 

May’s team have negotiated a dreadful deal and should not be given a second chance. The EU negotiators have put the UK is a dreadful position, however with EU elections coming up at the end of May they may well have blotted their own copybook. Their negotiating stance will seriously impede Ireland which currently spends 50% of its tax income on servicing its debt. Any reduction in tax income as a result of no deal will send the Irish economy into a tail spin and subsequently a nose dive. Ireland will require a bail out exceeding €80billion as a direct result of Barnier/Tusk/Junkers policy of punishing the UK.

 

There is only one option now on the table that does not subvert democracy and that is to head towards the 29th March without a deal and then negotiate other deals with France, with Spain afterwards.

 

A better slogan is "Deliver Brexit and then fix the UK".

 

Regards

Andrew

[Brian Kirby]

pelmetman - 2019-02-16 9:07 PM

Bulletguy - 2019-02-16 8:46 PM

747 - 2019-02-16 7:56 PM

malc d - 2019-02-16 7:46 PM

747 - 2019-02-16 7:16 PM

It is correct to say that both major British Political Parties are a complete shambles ..... but they will change if they realise that it will prevent them from being elected ..... and there we have it in a nutshell .... that is the difference between the UK and the EU.

It is called Demoocracy.

I would suggest that the UK is only seen as democratic by people who vote Labour or Tory.

Try voting for anyone else and see how much representation you get in Westminster. ;-)

It is not perfect but far better than Communism or Fascism.

While on the subject of Fascism, it would seem that Britain has many Fascist supporters ..... albeit not knowing that they are supporters of Fascism because they have been duped.

They are pro EU and it seems that the notion of an EU was first discussed in Berlin in 1942. I don't need to remind you who was in power in Germany in 1942 and who had plans for a Europe controlled by one entity (actually it was two because Italy was also to have a say in running Europe).

Here is a copy of the first EU planning document, translated into English. It is a long document but makes interesting reading. http://www.bilderberg.org/EWG.pdf

It now appears that our rampant Socialists on here are actually rampant something else Mein Herr.

Lol that old chestnut.....when all else fails, invoke Godwins law! The sure sign of rabid anti-EU pro-Brexiteers who have tried this on others forums. You'd best get up to speed and read this;

https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/lucandr%C3%A9-brunet/is-eu-nazi-project-debunking-enduring-myth

Just seen FP already quoted. ;-)

The German European agenda is the same........Its only the method that has changed ;-) ........

It's pretty obvious the EU and the Euro are there for the benefit of one nation *-) .........

Well, they certainly didn't think so at the time. They wanted to keep the Deutsche Mark. How odd.

[Brian Kirby]

ageingandrew - 2019-02-17 11:32 AM……………………….

Hello Brian,

 

1 Brexit is mired because of Parliament wanting to obstruct instead of construct and a PM who is not capable of working in a cooperative manner. This is evidenced by the dreadful deal she directed her negotiating team to bring back to us, a deal that can only be described as an unconditional surrender; a deal that was properly rejected by the Commons.

I don't think it is reasonable to say parliament wants to "do" anything. It has no collective view, as is evident from the various votes - except that it is unhappy with the May deal.

 

I don't think it reasonable to say that May "directed" her team to bring back that deal. The deal was what they could negotiate, given the brief they were handed. Unconditional surrender is a bit hyperbolic: it was what was possible. There might have been a better deal if the team had been given clear, attainable, objectives, but they were not. The main sticking point is the so-called Irish backstop, which is/was/should have been the visible stumbling block from the outset. Brexit, with no solution to the NI/Ireland border is, basically, undeliverable.

 

2 David Cameron tried to get us a better deal throughout 2014/15, but he failed. At the time the UK was soaking up a lot of EU unemployment from Spain, Greece, Italy, Romania, Bulgaria and France and of course those countries did not want their citizens to be denied access to the UK jobs market so refused him permission to ‘control our own borders’. This was a clear demonstration of how much sovereignty we had lost over the decades and that the EU was incapable of reform.

Yes, we were taking large numbers of migrants, but that was not Cameron's call, It was Blair's - when he failed to impose the same delay on migration rights for new entrants as had been adopted by the rest of the other members. Only UK left its doors wide open. It was a situation Cameron could not reverse. However, he could have applied the existing rules from that point on, but did not. Why? This was not punishment, it was simply the status quo.

 

3 We had a referendum because it was generally accepted that Parliament was not representative of the people. The referendum result proved that to be true.

Not, I think, because parliament was not representative of the people, but because the Conservatives were losing votes to UKIP, and agreeing to the referendum was seen as the way to get the votes back. From a Conservative, but not a national, standpoint, that view was vindicated by the result of the 2015 election that saw UKIP wiped out and an overall Conservative majority.

 

4 I totally disagree with your statement that “remain voters voted mainly on the basis of the damage to the UK economy that Brexit seemed most likely to cause”. I believe that remain voters voted against leave, against the buffoon Johnson, against Gove and others.

I can only answer for myself, and those I know, but on that basis, your belief is wrong. Our vote was in favour of membership, because we believe, based on the evidence provided, that remain represents the best overall outcome for the UK. What has emerged since the referendum has only served to reinforce that view, which is that Brexit, if it happens, will prove damaging to the UK economy, resulting in growing demands for government spending alongside falling tax revenues that, together, will result in increasing public borrowing and/or growing hardship for those whose livelihoods are affected by Brexit.

 

5 The remain campaign failed miserably to paint a compelling picture or vision of why the UK should remain in the EU and that is why they lost.

Agreed, but that does not make it wrong, just not as well organised, and I would say, despite the appalling campaign on both sides, somewhat more honest in its claims.

 

6 However, we are where we are. Yes, Brexit is about years of failed UK government policy, but UK government policy will not be fixed by staying in the EU.

Agreed, any more than it will be fixed by leaving. However, the impact on the economy from Brexit will make realising those policies more difficult, because they will inevitably require substantial spending, and the money for that spending will not be there..

 

7 Extending article 50 or holding a further referendum would be admissions that democracy will be subverted by Remain who will continue to sow fear, uncertainty, doubt and hyperbole in order to scare citizens into voting their way.

It has to be understood and accepted that democracy is not a single event at a single point in time. Were it so, it could not be democracy. Continuing to campaign for change to benefit the majority of one's compatriots is hardly undemocratic. Where is the democracy in saying we won, you lost, and the result must stand unchallenged in perpetuity?

 

8 May’s team have negotiated a dreadful deal and should not be given a second chance. The EU negotiators have put the UK is a dreadful position, however with EU elections coming up at the end of May they may well have blotted their own copybook. Their negotiating stance will seriously impede Ireland which currently spends 50% of its tax income on servicing its debt. Any reduction in tax income as a result of no deal will send the Irish economy into a tail spin and subsequently a nose dive. Ireland will require a bail out exceeding €80billion as a direct result of Barnier/Tusk/Junkers policy of punishing the UK.

Then I fail to understand how, recognising that impact, and presumably in the knowledge of the Belfast Agreement requirements, plus those of the Common Travel Area, plus the EU's normal requirement for security of its external border, you can reach the following conclusion.

 

There is only one option now on the table that does not subvert democracy and that is to head towards the 29th March without a deal and then negotiate other deals with France, with Spain afterwards.

 

A better slogan is "Deliver Brexit and then fix the UK".

 

Regards

Andrew

Were we to do that, we could not subsequently negotiate such trade deals with France, Spain, etc - because they are in the EU - so the only way to get those deals will be to negotiate them with the EU.

 

We would also, by common consensus, inflict on ourselves the largest economic hit of all yet identified versions of Brexit.

 

How is shoot ourselves in both feet, shoot Ireland in the bank, and risk resurrecting irish terrorism, all at a stroke, a good solution, for democracy or anything? I have to say this doctrine seems to me self-destructive. Have I misunderstood?

[Bulletguy]

pelmetman - 2019-02-17 7:43 AM

 

Bulletguy - 2019-02-16 10:54 PM

 

UK has benefited from huge amounts of EU funding

 

 

More FAKE NEWS *-) ..............

 

The UK has received a little bit of OUR MONEY back >:-) .............

You're beginning to get as tiresome as your little snowflake friend crying and wailing "fake news" every time you read something you don't like, so its time you began backing up your claims with some evidence. Simply saying "a little bit" is totally meaningless and just idle conjecture. Post up accounts showing all EU funding into UK since membership, businesses, buildings, universities, research etc etc. That should keep you busy for a few weeks.

 

 

pelmetman - 2019-02-17 8:00 AM

 

Bulletguy - 2019-02-16 10:54 PM

 

So far your lunacy has cost the UK £80 billion......£800 million a week every week with an economy you claim as "ticking over nicely" *-) plunging to a loss of 2% GDP.

 

Germany's GDP dropped from 2.2% in 2017 to 1.5% in 2018

 

Britain's GDP dropped from 1.8% in 2017 to 1.4% in 2018

 

So if a loss of 2% of GDP is plunging?....... What would you call Germany's?..........

 

Bombing? >:-) .......

A loss of 0.7% and just 0.2% between theirs and ours. Not bad given the vast amount industry they have compared to ours, most of which has been sold off including huge chunks of our infrastructure now owned by errrr.....well, countries you don't "like" such as Germany, France and Netherlands. This is what you Brexiteers call "taking back control", right? (lol) Are you going to start buying it all back? (lol)(lol)

 

Brian Kirby - 2019-02-17 11:05 AM

 

pelmetman - 2019-02-16 8:19 PM.........…..In 1976 the USSR was commonly known as RUSSIA...... even the Daily Telegraph thought so :D ...........

To which there is an eminently simple answer: the Telegraph was wrong.

 

Russia and the USSR were not the same thing, and Ukraine, as I pointed out above was, at that time, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.

 

All the Telegraph did was dumb-down the distinction, to assist its average cold war era reader.

 

Had you been on the Leningrad (now once more St Petersberg) trip in October 1966, you would have been to Russia, but you were on the Odessa trip, and you actually went to Ukraine (then the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic), which was part of the Soviet block, but not part of Russia.

 

Claiming Ukraine was, or ever has been, part of Russia, is just geographic illiteracy.

Yeah Odessa is miles away from Russia but seeing a Ruski flag on a ship was enough to convince Pelmet he had "been in" [Russia] !! Good job that Navy lark kept him mopping the decks and didn't let him loose with a map! And to think he was let loose driving a bus....it must have been a miracle any passengers got to the right destination! Easy to see why he ended up making puffs and pelmets!! (lol)

[Guest pelmetman]

Bulletguy - 2019-02-17 4:05 PM

 

pelmetman - 2019-02-17 7:43 AM

 

Bulletguy - 2019-02-16 10:54 PM

 

UK has benefited from huge amounts of EU funding

 

 

More FAKE NEWS *-) ..............

 

The UK has received a little bit of OUR MONEY back >:-) .............

You're beginning to get as tiresome as your little snowflake friend crying and wailing "fake news" every time you read something you don't like, so its time you began backing up your claims with some evidence. Simply saying "a little bit" is totally meaningless and just idle conjecture. Post up accounts showing all EU funding into UK since membership, businesses, buildings, universities, research etc etc. That should keep you busy for a few weeks.

 

 

pelmetman - 2019-02-17 8:00 AM

 

Bulletguy - 2019-02-16 10:54 PM

 

So far your lunacy has cost the UK £80 billion......£800 million a week every week with an economy you claim as "ticking over nicely" *-) plunging to a loss of 2% GDP.

 

Germany's GDP dropped from 2.2% in 2017 to 1.5% in 2018

 

Britain's GDP dropped from 1.8% in 2017 to 1.4% in 2018

 

So if a loss of 2% of GDP is plunging?....... What would you call Germany's?..........

 

Bombing? >:-) .......

A loss of 0.7% and just 0.2% between theirs and ours. Not bad given the vast amount industry they have compared to ours, most of which has been sold off including huge chunks of our infrastructure now owned by errrr.....well, countries you don't "like" such as Germany, France and Netherlands. This is what you Brexiteers call "taking back control", right? (lol) Are you going to start buying it all back? (lol)(lol)

 

Brian Kirby - 2019-02-17 11:05 AM

 

pelmetman - 2019-02-16 8:19 PM.........…..In 1976 the USSR was commonly known as RUSSIA...... even the Daily Telegraph thought so :D ...........

To which there is an eminently simple answer: the Telegraph was wrong.

 

Russia and the USSR were not the same thing, and Ukraine, as I pointed out above was, at that time, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.

 

All the Telegraph did was dumb-down the distinction, to assist its average cold war era reader.

 

Had you been on the Leningrad (now once more St Petersberg) trip in October 1966, you would have been to Russia, but you were on the Odessa trip, and you actually went to Ukraine (then the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic), which was part of the Soviet block, but not part of Russia.

 

Claiming Ukraine was, or ever has been, part of Russia, is just geographic illiteracy.

Yeah Odessa is miles away from Russia but seeing a Ruski flag on a ship was enough to convince Pelmet he had "been in" [Russia] !! Good job that Navy lark kept him mopping the decks and didn't let him loose with a map! And to think he was let loose driving a bus....it must have been a miracle any passengers got to the right destination! Easy to see why he ended up making puffs and pelmets!! (lol)

 

Damn your thick Bullet 8-) .......

 

You are so seriously stupid you cant see past your own racist xenophobia (lol) (lol) (lol) .......

 

 

[teflon2]

Brian Kirby - 2019-02-16 2:38 PM

 

pelmetman - 2019-02-13 8:57 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2019-02-13 8:38 PM

 

pelmetman - 2019-02-09 1:29 PM...…………..

We were lied to 40 odd years ago when we were told we could join a Common Market >:-) ......…

It is strange that such a serious minded and precocious youth failed to read the papers in 1973, and remained unaware of the nature of the European Economic Community (AKA the Common Market), it origins, and the changes it had already made. We did join, though, so what was the actual lie? Could that now mature youth point to it?

 

That precocious youth has become a belligerent Brexiteer after 46 years experience of EU membership >:-) ...........

So there was no lie: you were told you could join a Common Market, and you did.

 

 

 

We were lied to by omission we were deceived by a surreptitious design to build a central federal European government, as is obvious the present EU bears no similarity to the common market we were led to believe was the objective.of the vote. :D

[Guest pelmetman]

Brian Kirby - 2019-02-17 11:05 AM

 

pelmetman - 2019-02-16 8:19 PM.........…..In 1976 the USSR was commonly known as RUSSIA...... even the Daily Telegraph thought so :D ...........

To which there is an eminently simple answer: the Telegraph was wrong.

 

Russia and the USSR were not the same thing, and Ukraine, as I pointed out above was, at that time, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.

 

All the Telegraph did was dumb-down the distinction, to assist its average cold war era reader.

 

Had you been on the Leningrad (now once more St Petersberg) trip in October 1966, you would have been to Russia, but you were on the Odessa trip, and you actually went to Ukraine (then the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic), which was part of the Soviet block, but not part of Russia.

 

Claiming Ukraine was, or ever has been, part of Russia, is just geographic illiteracy.

 

Yeah Brian like you were there *-) .......

 

So the Russian ship that visited Portsmouth at the same time was from the Ukraine? :-S .......

 

How desperate you Remoaners have become 8-) ..........