Are we sleep-walking out of Europe ?
Posted by: Don Atkinson on 09 February 2016
Media interest seems to be focused on the trivial matter of "in-work benefits" to migrant workers from Europe.
Very little informed discussion of the benefits and consequences of us remaining part of Europe v the benefits and consequences of us leaving.
Or am I just not tuning into the appropriate TV channel or overlooking some "White Paper" that is on sale in WH Smith ?
MDS posted:Resurrection - for the avoidance of doubt, I wasn't attempted to call you a Jihadist. Honest. And, in any event I took the use of the term by Norman to be more about the single-minded and unthinking rush towards economic suicide, rather than the conventional terrorist meaning.
“Jihad is an Arabic word which literally means striving or struggling, especially with a praiseworthy aim.”
Resurrection posted:Honestly, am not being over provocative, just pointing out a few home truths no matter how unappealing you guys may find them.
Rubbish. Of course you are.
Resurrection posted:jihadists were freely allowed to enter our country via the open borders you Remainers continue to advocate.
See?
Then there's the fact that your previous post was sneeringly ad hominem at the beginning and intolerantly totalitarian by the end. That's pretty provocative, too.
If you want to defend brexit then I hope you feel free to do so. For example if you can offer some good reasons why people don't need to worry about the things raised here which clearly do worry them (and me), then they would be very welcome, I'm sure. We could all do with some of that, I think. The problem is that on current evidence here and elsewhere, there doesn't appear to be much to be said to that effect.
Eloise posted:MDS posted:Resurrection - for the avoidance of doubt, I wasn't attempted to call you a Jihadist. Honest. And, in any event I took the use of the term by Norman to be more about the single-minded and unthinking rush towards economic suicide, rather than the conventional terrorist meaning.
“Jihad is an Arabic word which literally means striving or struggling, especially with a praiseworthy aim.”
Crikey, Eloise. I was vaguely aware of the first part but not the second! The media should be more careful in using the term. Perhaps the PotUS's (as you know, we can't use the name) terms are more appropriate after all.
MDS posted:Eloise posted:MDS posted:Resurrection - for the avoidance of doubt, I wasn't attempted to call you a Jihadist. Honest. And, in any event I took the use of the term by Norman to be more about the single-minded and unthinking rush towards economic suicide, rather than the conventional terrorist meaning.
“Jihad is an Arabic word which literally means striving or struggling, especially with a praiseworthy aim.”
Crikey, Eloise. I was vaguely aware of the first part but not the second! The media should be more careful in using the term. Perhaps the PotUS's (as you know, we can't use the name) terms are more appropriate after all.
Well like many terms common usage is corrupted from its “pure” meaning.
The “praiseworthy aim” would be the debatable part.
How about ... “the loser fervour of her hard-Brexit suicide bombers, and the excruciating economic results if they are indulged...”
You're right... much better!
Eloise posted:MDS posted:Resurrection - for the avoidance of doubt, I wasn't attempted to call you a Jihadist. Honest. And, in any event I took the use of the term by Norman to be more about the single-minded and unthinking rush towards economic suicide, rather than the conventional terrorist meaning.
“Jihad is an Arabic word which literally means striving or struggling, especially with a praiseworthy aim.”
Are you even trying to be serious, Eloise? I find your deliberate misrepresentation of the word 'jihad' even more offensive than the original i today posting. You are attempting to give valudity to the utterly detestable
Dave***t posted:Resurrection posted:Honestly, am not being over provocative, just pointing out a few home truths no matter how unappealing you guys may find them.
Rubbish. Of course you are.
Resurrection posted:jihadists were freely allowed to enter our country via the open borders you Remainers continue to advocate.See?
Then there's the fact that your previous post was sneeringly ad hominem at the beginning and intolerantly totalitarian by the end. That's pretty provocative, too.
If you want to defend brexit then I hope you feel free to do so. For example if you can offer some good reasons why people don't need to worry about the things raised here which clearly do worry them (and me), then they would be very welcome, I'm sure. We could all do with some of that, I think. The problem is that on current evidence here and elsewhere, there doesn't appear to be much to be said to that effect.
You see Dave, you're coming at this from a completely different perspective. You don't like my perspective and I don't like yours, but lay off the ad hominem sanctimony it only impresses your own acolytes. I have had plenty of the ad hominem stuff from your own side.
Resurrection posted:Eloise posted:MDS posted:Resurrection - for the avoidance of doubt, I wasn't attempted to call you a Jihadist. Honest. And, in any event I took the use of the term by Norman to be more about the single-minded and unthinking rush towards economic suicide, rather than the conventional terrorist meaning.
“Jihad is an Arabic word which literally means striving or struggling, especially with a praiseworthy aim.”
Are you even trying to be serious, Eloise? I find your deliberate misrepresentation of the word 'jihad' even more offensive than the original i today posting. You are attempting to give valudity to the utterly detestable
Eloise is factually correct.
At least check your facts before attacking someone.
(I could make another point here but I believe it to be unnecessary.)
It would be interesting to have not just the promises of a wonderful future for the country after brexit, but a clear, rational and factually supported explanation as to HOW this is to be achieved and how the promises are to be met.
Note that to be considered reliable, this will have to both explain how this is to be achieved irrespective of the outcome of negotiations with the EU, and also free of hollow or vague blandishments instead being based on verifiable fact.
Huge posted:It would be interesting to have not just the promises of a wonderful future for the country after brexit, but a clear, rational and factually supported explanation as to HOW this is to be achieved and how the promises are to be met.
Note that to be considered reliable, this will have to both explain how this is to be achieved irrespective of the outcome of negotiations with the EU, and also free of hollow or vague blandishments instead being based on verifiable fact.
Couldn’t agree more.
I have been inviting “Leavers” to provide such explanations for over a year.
None have been forthcoming!
At least, not yet.
Ah ! Resurrected !
The Naim gives it away (well, the Mu-so and B&W A7 speakers)
I thought we hadn't seen you since 15th May. Your points of view seem to be more coherent than before. Most of us, and yes that includes me, don't agree with your points of view. But at least for now, they are more clearly expressed. But as Huge and others have stated, no explanation as to how we are to achieve the benefits of Brexit, or even what those benefits might be. I appreciate that YOUR perceived benefits are very straight forward - "we are free from the EU."
Welcome back !
I like lively debate amongst friends and I certainly consider myself to have a lot in common with fellow Naim owners on our own forum but this thread has been surprisingly nasty at times.
Being called 'niaive, stupid, idiots and ad hominem' just because I happen to be at odds with those who disliked the outcome of the EU referendum is really poor form.
Ray
thebigfredc posted:I like lively debate amongst friends and I certainly consider myself to have a lot in common with fellow Naim owners on our own forum but this thread has been surprisingly nasty at times.
Being called 'niaive, stupid, idiots and ad hominem' just because I happen to be at odds with those who disliked the outcome of the EU referendum is really poor form.
I’m not defending everything that’s been written here (and nastiness if any exists goes both ways), however...
I believe (without going through all the 60-odd pages of comments) any accusation of being “naive” is about specific comments made rather than about individuals.
I believe that “stupid” and “idiots” are not aimed at all Leave voters, many have had specific well reasoned opinions which lead them to vote Leave, but those who really did believe it would give £350m a week for the NHS and that Leaving would be easy and have no consequence to the U.K. economy, etc.
”Ad hominem” means arguments which are simply attacking the person making the point, rather than attacking the point they made.
thebigfredc posted:I like lively debate amongst friends and I certainly consider myself to have a lot in common with fellow Naim owners on our own forum but this thread has been surprisingly nasty at times.
Being called 'niaive, stupid, idiots and ad hominem' just because I happen to be at odds with those who disliked the outcome of the EU referendum is really poor form.
Ray
Ray, my thoughts exactly.
Don Atkinson posted:Ah ! Resurrected !
The Naim gives it away (well, the Mu-so and B&W A7 speakers)
I thought we hadn't seen you since 15th May. Your points of view seem to be more coherent than before. Most of us, and yes that includes me, don't agree with your points of view. But at least for now, they are more clearly expressed. But as Huge and others have stated, no explanation as to how we are to achieve the benefits of Brexit, or even what those benefits might be. I appreciate that YOUR perceived benefits are very straight forward - "we are free from the EU."
Welcome back !
Ha! Ha! Am being well chaperoned this time. My hardware has changed a bit since last week as well. The B&W A7 now has a bigger brother in a pair of 803 D3s. I had looked at Naim gear to help drive them but in the end went to Devialet for a single box solution to accompany my AV equipment, and I don't mean the Sky Box.
Anyway, to return to the subject. I, of course, can offer no magic solutions or pills, other than poison ones, that will convince ardent Remainers that all will be well in 2019. On the other hand, my sheer frustration with the EU convinces myself that we will thrive out of the clutches of what I perceive as a malignant institution.
The gap is a yawning chasm between myself and most of the other posters in this thread but am quite happy to plough my own lonely furrow, or as you might say, crusade.
thebigfredc posted:Being called 'niaive, stupid, idiots and ad hominem' just because I happen to be at odds with those who disliked the outcome of the EU referendum is really poor form.
In case the ad hominem bit of that is aimed at me, I'd point out that ad hominem isn't an insult (at least not as I used it), it's just the correct name for the way Resurrection sought to personally belittle those who disagree with him.
Actually on topic, I said a few posts back that I thought it'd be interesting to see what would happen with the publication or otherwise of the impact statements by the government. Turns out that despite being told not to redact anything, DD has published them in heavily redacted form, and as a result there have been threats to seek prosecution for contempt of parliament.
Wonder what will happen next...
Ray, why not explain clearly and concisely why you voted “Leave” and what you perceive the benefits and opportunities will be ?
Appart from one particular post above, I have avoided slipping into the rehoric of calling all Leavers idiots. Based on my experience and aquaintenances, many are unable to explain their reasons for choosing to leave. I consider such people idiots. I am sure you are not.
Many more now wish they could vote again when the potential “deal” is fianalised. Would this be such an undemocratic proposition. ?
Huge posted:Resurrection posted:Eloise posted:MDS posted:Resurrection - for the avoidance of doubt, I wasn't attempted to call you a Jihadist. Honest. And, in any event I took the use of the term by Norman to be more about the single-minded and unthinking rush towards economic suicide, rather than the conventional terrorist meaning.
“Jihad is an Arabic word which literally means striving or struggling, especially with a praiseworthy aim.”
Are you even trying to be serious, Eloise? I find your deliberate misrepresentation of the word 'jihad' even more offensive than the original i today posting. You are attempting to give valudity to the utterly detestable
Eloise is factually correct.
At least check your facts before attacking someone.
(I could make another point here but I believe it to be unnecessary.)
Huge, I'm sorry but Eloise is not factually correct (if one avoids answering this correctly) and even without looking it up on Wikipedia most people can easily tell you that this was a deliberate attempt to avoid answering this honestly. If you continue reading it is clear that this word can have many different meanings as follows but the most frequent understanding has nothing to do with a praiseworthy aim.
Jihad (English: /dʒɪˈhɑːd/; Arabic: جهاد jihād [dʒɪˈhaːd]) is an Arabic word which literally means striving or struggling, especially with a praiseworthy aim.[1][2][3][4] It can have many shades of meaning in an Islamic context, such as struggle against one's evil inclinations, an exertion to convert unbelievers, or efforts toward the moral betterment of society,[1][2][5] though it is most frequently associated with war.[6] In classical Islamic law, the term refers to armed struggle against unbelievers,[2][3] while modernist Islamic scholars generally equate military jihad with defensive warfare.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad
Without splitting hairs, it is undeniable that if you ask anyone who knows, jihad today simply means only one thing: it is a struggle or fight against the enemies of Islam.
Don Atkinson posted:Ray, why not explain clearly and concisely why you voted “Leave” and what you perceive the benefits and opportunities will be ?
Appart from one particular post above, I have avoided slipping into the rehoric of calling all Leavers idiots. Based on my experience and aquaintenances, many are unable to explain their reasons for choosing to leave. I consider such people idiots. I am sure you are not.
Many more now wish they could vote again when the potential “deal” is fianalised. Would this be such an undemocratic proposition. ?
Yep, step up Ray. Tell us what the advantages of the UK going it alone will be.
Hi
I already have ......see my posts on page 62. Nobody from the Remain side of the fence commented on them at the time.
Ray
Don Atkinson posted:Ah ! Resurrected !
The Naim gives it away (well, the Mu-so and B&W A7 speakers)
I thought we hadn't seen you since 15th May. Your points of view seem to be more coherent than before. Most of us, and yes that includes me, don't agree with your points of view. But at least for now, they are more clearly expressed. But as Huge and others have stated, no explanation as to how we are to achieve the benefits of Brexit, or even what those benefits might be. I appreciate that YOUR perceived benefits are very straight forward - "we are free from the EU."
Welcome back !
Ha! Ha! Am being well chaperoned this time. My hardware has changed a bit since last week as well. The B&W A7 now has a bigger brother in a pair of 803 D3s. I had looked at Naim gear to help drive them but in the end went to Devialet for a single box solution to accompany my AV equipment, and I don't mean the Sky Box.
Anyway, to return to the subject. I, of course, can offer no magic solutions or pills, other than poison ones, that will convince ardent Remainers that all will be well in 2019. On the other hand, my sheer frustration with the EU convinces myself that we will thrive out of the clutches of what I perceive as a malignant institution.
The gap is a yawning chasm between myself and most of the other posters in this thread but am quite happy to plough my own lonely furrow, or as you might say, crusade.
There have been many requests for a detailed, positive response from Brexiteers by posters on this thread. My most favourite former leftie commentator from The Times, Melanie Philips, posted the attached article this morning, which has provoked a huge response not necessarily positive. If nothing else it articulates the sentiments of many Brexiteers including myself and will give Eloise mountains of ammunition to dissect and comment on for weeks to come. If you can't read it due to subscription restrictions I could try to cut and paste the whole thing later. Enjoy! ????
Elioise,
This one's for yourself and the real meaning of the word "jihad" again from this morning's Times.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edi...ist-terror-klpwlgq2m
Even if you cannot read the whole article the URL should give you a clue.
Florestan posted:Huge posted:Resurrection posted:Eloise posted:MDS posted:Resurrection - for the avoidance of doubt, I wasn't attempted to call you a Jihadist. Honest. And, in any event I took the use of the term by Norman to be more about the single-minded and unthinking rush towards economic suicide, rather than the conventional terrorist meaning.
“Jihad is an Arabic word which literally means striving or struggling, especially with a praiseworthy aim.”
Are you even trying to be serious, Eloise? I find your deliberate misrepresentation of the word 'jihad' even more offensive than the original i today posting. You are attempting to give valudity to the utterly detestable
Eloise is factually correct.
At least check your facts before attacking someone.
(I could make another point here but I believe it to be unnecessary.)
Huge, I'm sorry but Eloise is not factually correct (if one avoids answering this correctly) and even without looking it up on Wikipedia most people can easily tell you that this was a deliberate attempt to avoid answering this honestly. If you continue reading it is clear that this word can have many different meanings as follows but the most frequent understanding has nothing to do with a praiseworthy aim.
Jihad (English: /dʒɪˈhɑːd/; Arabic: جهاد jihād [dʒɪˈhaːd]) is an Arabic word which literally means striving or struggling, especially with a praiseworthy aim.[1][2][3][4] It can have many shades of meaning in an Islamic context, such as struggle against one's evil inclinations, an exertion to convert unbelievers, or efforts toward the moral betterment of society,[1][2][5] though it is most frequently associated with war.[6] In classical Islamic law, the term refers to armed struggle against unbelievers,[2][3] while modernist Islamic scholars generally equate military jihad with defensive warfare.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad
Without splitting hairs, it is undeniable that if you ask anyone who knows, jihad today simply means only one thing: it is a struggle or fight against the enemies of Islam.
Eloise is factually correct even by your modified definition.
Jihad is an Arabic word which literally means striving or struggling, especially with a praiseworthy aim.
More recently it has come to primarily be used in one specific context - the struggle against the enemies of Islam - but use in other contexts is not excluded by this. There are plenty of words in English which have both specific meaning and also a more general meaning; the general meaning isn't excluded by the specific meaning. Why should Arabic be any different?
Two observations about the more specific use of jihad:
1 This isn't inconsistent with the literal meaning, since...
2 The people who use it about themselves consider this to be entirely within the literal meaning, including the term referring to a praiseworthy aim.
Personally I think those who use it in the context of a violent armed struggle against other who don't share their narrow outmoded view of Islam are wrong about the praiseworthy aim (and I whole heartedly condemn them for the atrocities they commit in the name of Islam), but I equally have no doubt that they believe it themselves.
Resurrection posted:This one's for yourself and the real meaning of the word "jihad" again from this morning's Times.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edi...ist-terror-klpwlgq2m
Even if you cannot read the whole article the URL should give you a clue.
The "correct" meaning of Jihad is as I spoke about above ... the word has been corrupted by those intent on evil as you are now corrupting what I wrote!
Moderated Post: Eloise, I have edited - please keep on point and refrain from making ad hominem comments. Thanks.
Eloise, I apologise if I invaded your safe space by demonstrating clearly to yourself what the word "jihadist" actually means and what they do by highlighting it with a perfect example..