Are we sleep-walking out of Europe ?

 

No it wouldn't, and you know it.

You obviously derive some satisfaction from the ridiculous labels you apply to Jeremy Corbyn. So far you would have him as a Communist, treasonous, traitorous and now an anti Semite. Do you really think that these ludicrous assertions lend any weight to your arguments or diatribes?

If indeed there are anti-Semites in the Labour party, and I'm sure there will be a few in an organisation of this size then I am equally sure that they will be rooted out and expelled from the party. However, I guess that in order to lend weight to your anti-Labour position you are deliberately conflating anti-Semitism (which is absolutely abhorrent in line with all other forms of racism) with support for the plight of the (ordinary) Palestinians, or with opposition to some of the expansionist policies of Netanyahu and some others on the Orthodox far right of Israeli politics.

 

Ha! Ha! Sore point, eh? There is blatant ant-Semitism in Corbyn's Party and you know it. They will be rooted out, eh! Just like Livingstone is still not rooted out, as well as all the Momentum candidates whose vile postings on Twitter etc are coming back to haunt them. You are a man in complete denial of plain facts. There is absolutely no moral high ground for you Corbynistas to stand upon and lecture the rest of us. And as for the Palestinian card, all I can say to you is Hizbollah. No one is stopping the Palestinians from creating a decent society for themselves except for the Palestinians and the leaders they 'elect'. Denial from you one more time.

TOBYJUG posted:

     Wasn't Jeremy Corbyn overheard saying to someone at a bus stop "What time is the next bus, jew"

No.

You missed that word from the end of your sentence  (phonetic spelling, as presumably was your last word)

TOBYJUG posted:

     Wasn't Jeremy Corbyn overheard saying to someone at a bus stop "What time is the next bus, jew"

Actually, what he also said to McCluskey was, "How much am I jew to you for your valued support?"

Resurrection posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

Resurrection posted:     

And can we please take away all the anti-Semites on the left? That should rebalance the books. 

That should read: “Can we please take away all racists wherever they may be, left, right or centre, that would make Britain a better place.” And indeed all those with anti-equality mindsets.

Morning, IB. No, it should read as I wrote it. Using race, religion, culture or whatever as an excuse to close down discussions is a very dangerous game. Any of the above group of words have been and will be used as justification for perpetrating or suppressing most of humanity's nastiest crimes.

Yet claims of anti-Semitism are used to shut down criticism of Israel and criticism of the actions of individuals who happen to be Jewish.  Isn't that exactly the same thing you are complaining about?

Innocent Bystander posted:

TOBYJUG posted:

Wasn't Jeremy Corbyn overheard saying to someone at a bus stop "What time is the next bus, jew"

No.

You missed that word from the end of your sentence  (phonetic spelling, as presumably was your last word)

I think it was meant as a joke ... though with something so unfunny about something so serious its hard to tell!

Eloise posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

TOBYJUG posted:

Wasn't Jeremy Corbyn overheard saying to someone at a bus stop "What time is the next bus, jew"

No.

You missed that word from the end of your sentence  (phonetic spelling, as presumably was your last word)

I think it was meant as a joke ... though with something so unfunny about something so serious its hard to tell!

I recognised that - so was my response!

Innocent Bystander posted:

Eloise posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

TOBYJUG posted:

Wasn't Jeremy Corbyn overheard saying to someone at a bus stop "What time is the next bus, jew"

No.

You missed that word from the end of your sentence  (phonetic spelling, as presumably was your last word)

I think it was meant as a joke ... though with something so unfunny about something so serious its hard to tell!

I recognised that - so was my response!

Okay ... now I get your meaning ... I was reading Toby's as "What time is the next bus due?"; you were suggesting "What time is the next bus, do you know?".  

Still unfunny!

Eloise posted:

Resurrection posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

Resurrection posted:     

And can we please take away all the anti-Semites on the left? That should rebalance the books. 

That should read: “Can we please take away all racists wherever they may be, left, right or centre, that would make Britain a better place.” And indeed all those with anti-equality mindsets.

Morning, IB. No, it should read as I wrote it. Using race, religion, culture or whatever as an excuse to close down discussions is a very dangerous game. Any of the above group of words have been and will be used as justification for perpetrating or suppressing most of humanity's nastiest crimes.

Yet claims of anti-Semitism are used to shut down criticism of Israel and criticism of the actions of individuals who happen to be Jewish.  Isn't that exactly the same thing you are complaining about?

Wait until you see some of my other replies. ????

Not a joke I made up. More an article from the web a few weeks ago. Fake news seems to be more real than the real thing.

Coming from a not too far a Jewish background, can I position myself to have authorship over this joke ? Didn't Mel Brooks do spring time for Hitler or something ? Does it mean anything to anyone else that this doesn't mean anything to me ?

Could someone explain to a european mainland citizen what makes the Brexiteers think they would be better off on their own in todays globalized world of Trumps, Putins and Erdogans? In short what exactly weighs heavy enough to justify a vote to leave the EU despite the fact that this organization has made possible 70+ years of peace in Europe?

zikarus posted:

Could someone explain to a european mainland citizen what makes the Brexiteers think they would be better off on their own in todays globalized world of Trumps, Putins and Erdogans? What exactly could justify a vote to leave the EU despite the fact that this organization has made possible 70+ years of peace in Europe?

We would continue to spell ‘organise’ the correct way and could also continue to be a member of NATO, the real defence, sic, of Europe.

zikarus posted:

Could someone explain to a european mainland citizen what makes the Brexiteers think they would be better off on their own in todays globalized world of Trumps, Putins and Erdogans? In short what exactly weighs heavy enough to justify a vote to leave the EU despite the fact that this organization has made possible 70+ years of peace in Europe?

The answer is not a straightforward simple one, with many factors involved. 

1. Clearly one big factor is cost, as in the UK putting a lot of money in, with not a lot tangible out, whereas some countries seem to receive more money from the EU than they put in. Depending how much regard an individual has for the benefit of helping others, and whether the intangibles are recognised as worth the cost.
2. Another big one is the creeping los of sovereignty, the EU seemingly moving inexorably towards a single nation, “united states of Europe” perhaps, and don’t like the changes that imposes on us, potentially taking away or at least diluting what makes us British, and with it losing aspects of what is seen to be our freedom.

The second of those is one that concerns me, and if we were being asked if we wanted to join the EU, with that side of things clearly on the table, I might say no - but to me, being in the EU already, rather than leave, Britain should be expending serious effort to showing others what may be seen as wrong with this trend, and find a way harmoniously of agreeing what a good Europe would look like while allowing member states to retain their own character freedoms.

People didn't vote to leave, that's the thing. 

For me, and many others, it was one week on the news that this vote was going to take place for everyone.  Almost the next week the vote was over and " everyone" had voted.   I didn't vote because in truth I didn't know what I was voting for, I didn't even know what Brexit meant as a word until after the fact. 

If it was organised that the public had a year or two to consider ? But it didn't happen like that.

Innocent Bystander posted:

zikarus posted:

Could someone explain to a european mainland citizen what makes the Brexiteers think they would be better off on their own in todays globalized world of Trumps, Putins and Erdogans? In short what exactly weighs heavy enough to justify a vote to leave the EU despite the fact that this organization has made possible 70+ years of peace in Europe?

The answer is not a straightforward simple one, with many factors involved. 

1. Clearly one big factor is cost, as in the UK putting a lot of money in, with not a lot tangible out, whereas some countries seem to receive more money from the EU than they put in. Depending how much regard an individual has for the benefit of helping others, and whether the intangibles are recognised as worth the cost.
2. Another big one is the creeping los of sovereignty, the EU seemingly moving inexorably towards a single nation, “united states of Europe” perhaps, and don’t like the changes that imposes on us, potentially taking away or at least diluting what makes us British, and with it losing aspects of what is seen to be our freedom.

The second of those is one that concerns me, and if we were being asked if we wanted to join the EU, with that side of things clearly on the table, I might say no - but to me, being in the EU already, rather than leave, Britain should be expending serious effort to showing others what may be seen as wrong with this trend, and find a way harmoniously of agreeing what a good Europe would look like while allowing member states to retain their own character freedoms.

What exactly is frightening about a "USE"? Somewhat funny to hear that from a citizen of 'Great Britain' being something of a 'United States' (of Britain) too...

zikarus posted:

Could someone explain to a european mainland citizen what makes the Brexiteers think they would be better off on their own in todays globalized world of Trumps, Putins and Erdogans? In short what exactly weighs heavy enough to justify a vote to leave the EU despite the fact that this organization has made possible 70+ years of peace in Europe?

It may actually be worth reading the opening page or so of this thread, when the upcoming referendum was being discussed, and the mixture of lack of knowledge and varied beliefs were was evident - and that was before the campaign to stir people to vote to leave, and counter-campain not to leave, started, with all the distortions, unsubstantiated assumptions, misleading or possibly deliberately false claims that then ensued.

TOBYJUG posted:

People didn't vote to leave, that's the thing. 

For me, and many others, it was one week on the news that this vote was going to take place for everyone.  Almost the next week the vote was over and " everyone" had voted.   I didn't vote because in truth I didn't know what I was voting for, I didn't even know what Brexit meant as a word until after the fact. 

If it was organised that the public had a year or two to consider ? But it didn't happen like that.

Oops, that sounds a bit frightening. True? Hard to believe that such a cutting edge decision would not have been discussed for months at least. Never understood btw why it was possible that this question has been decided without an obligatory 2/3 majority at least. 

Bad information, fear of the foreign, wishful thinking.

Innocent Bystander posted:

zikarus posted:

Could someone explain to a european mainland citizen what makes the Brexiteers think they would be better off on their own in todays globalized world of Trumps, Putins and Erdogans? In short what exactly weighs heavy enough to justify a vote to leave the EU despite the fact that this organization has made possible 70+ years of peace in Europe?

It may actually be worth reading the opening page or so of this thread, when the upcoming referendum was being discussed, and the mixture of lack of knowledge and varied beliefs were was evident - and that was before the campaign to stir people to vote to leave, and counter-campain not to leave, started, with all the distortions, unsubstantiated assumptions, misleading or possibly deliberately false claims that then ensued.

I think I understood what was discussed at the time.

I never understood though that all these - imo - trivialities / mostly irrelevancies or at least subsidiaries (?) were able to overrule the big picture in the end... 

Beachcomber posted:

Bad information, fear of the foreign, wishful thinking.

Is that really heavy enough? 

(My question addresses especially the Brexiteers btw)

zikarus posted:

What exactly is frightening about a "USE"? Somewhat funny to hear that from a citizen of 'Great Britain' being something of a 'United States' (of Britain) too...

Not frightening, but maybe seen by people as not having the values or character that they like.

For me, I rather like being British. (Though with some things in recent years I have not always been proud to admit to being British.) And, I like the French to be French, Italians Italian, Germans German etc.  If we were all one homogenous lot, the only thing of interest travelling would be whether the weather is better, wheras now I can see and learn from and enjoy meeting people from different cultures. 

As for UK, yes you are right - but it has been essentially lime that for so long that it is the Britain I, and those of my ancestors that were British, grew up in over generations, with only a slow evolution. Also, arguably at least, and some will disagree, some parts of the UK may be rather too small to prosper on their own in the world, whereas Britain is large enough.

Maybe if USE were to happen over a couple of centuries, in with small steps each generation, it would go unnoticed, and I can’t say categorically that it would be a bad thing. Indeed, that is misleading, the states of Europe united where we are united in promoting peace and harmony and prosperity, and weeding out violence and intolerance poverty would in my view be a very Good Thing - so maybe that is what the EU should aspire to become, the SEU, not USE.

zikarus posted:

TOBYJUG posted:

People didn't vote to leave, that's the thing. 

For me, and many others, it was one week on the news that this vote was going to take place for everyone.  Almost the next week the vote was over and " everyone" had voted.   I didn't vote because in truth I didn't know what I was voting for, I didn't even know what Brexit meant as a word until after the fact. 

If it was organised that the public had a year or two to consider ? But it didn't happen like that.

Oops, that sounds a bit frightening. True? Hard to believe that such a cutting edge decision would not have been discussed for months at least. Never understood btw why it was possible that this question has been decided without an obligatory 2/3 majority at least. 

I think many of us didn’t understand why it was rushed - I got the impression it was a political ruse by the UK’s parliamentary party in power at the time, thinking that there was no way the answer would be to leave, but hoping to gain benefit from having put it to a vote - but they hadn’t taken it seriously enough, nor gauged the amount of ill will against them, the party, and leadership, that caused people to vote ‘leave’ just to shock the Government. 

Brexiteers will deny that, but of all all people I know personally who voted ‘leave’, every one did not expect or want that to happen, and were horribly shocked when the result was announced. I believe the swing to “leave” was purely the result of there being so many such people, though of course there is no measure of that.

I suspect that if a “please confirm” referendum were to be offered now, there would be an overwhelming majority saying no. It is a pity the EU itself does not insist on such a vote! (Now that really would be anathema to people like Resurrection, already terrified in case it happens.)

Resurrection posted:

Duncan Mann posted:

Resurrection posted:

 You can argue about the historical context of the Referendum, but that time has passed and you really are just whistling in the wind if you think that your 50 shades of grey opinions are going to change a single thing. 

An afraid your illusionary bubble has been well and truly burst!

Nope. Never had any illusions - as I said earlier in this thread "I suspect that TM will ultimately be forced to back down on the customs union, though we will be out of the EU in name." Sounds pretty realistic to me - I voted Remain, I accept that Article 50 will be notionally implemented - though the bit about the customs union might be pretty scary for you if TM loses the coming Commons face off with her saner MPs who are not willing to trash British industry on the altar of extreme right-wing ideology. TM always follows the line of least resistance, so it will be fun to see her squirm. 

I see, you believe that the Remain Cabal have the levers of power and that they can force their demands not only on the majority who voted to Leave the EU but also have the PM under their control.

Sounds to me that the EU has worked its magic in separating state control from the electorate to a directorate answerable only to itself and its self belief. Not impressed with your Orwellian society or your imaginary right wing excuses for power grabbing. 

I'm sorry Resurrection, I've read your comment several times and still find it incoherent - but I'll have a go at replying. 

Seems to me that the people who are forcing their demands on the British electorate are the neoliberal minority of the Tory party who have hijacked the political agenda in recent years in their monomaniacal pursuit of Brexit. It is widely understood that the majority of Tory MPs (indeed MPs of all parties) are not avidly in favour of what has been termed hard Brexit. Since the referendum, however, the circa 21 MPs of the European Research Group chaired by Jacob Rees-Mogg have been able to exert undue influence on TM, and thus government policy. Right now, I'd say that their views seem to be picking up where UKIP left off. Their views do not represent the mainstream views of the UK populace. They have been able to exert this influence through the threat of pulling the rug from under the Tory Party leader of the day - be that DC or TM. Unity  has been the absolute priority for the leadership of the Tory Party as the expense of practically every other policy development since the coalition government of 2010. DC wouldn't have foisted the referendum upon the UK if it hadn't been for the malign influence of both UKIP and the ERG. They are the right-wingers here! For what it's worth, I've never been accused of being right-wing in my life, so that's a novel experience...

I DO accept that the EU is badly in need of becoming more democratically accountable, and there's lots as aspects of its bureaucracy I dislike - but the right wing press here in the UK has done a pretty good job of demonising it as an entity. The more astute among us will use myth-busting websites to debunk many of the myths perpetuated about the EU, but the less politically-savvy (or those with lives too busy to have time) end up buying into this demonisation - or sitting on the fence and not voting.

But in the round, the EU has been a force for good, and we would be better off being in it and democratically pushing for reform than out of it and effectively losing any control over our destiny. Like it or not, we will have regulatory ties to the EU for the foreseeable future, as that is where our main markets lie, and where our cultural ties are strongest. 

Innocent Bystander posted:

zikarus posted:

What exactly is frightening about a "USE"? Somewhat funny to hear that from a citizen of 'Great Britain' being something of a 'United States' (of Britain) too...

Not frightening, but maybe seen by people as not having the values or character that they like.

For me, I rather like being British. (Though with some things in recent years I have not always been proud to admit to being British.) And, I like the French to be French, Italians Italian, Germans German etc.  If we were all one homogenous lot, the only thing of interest travelling would be whether the weather is better, wheras now I can see and learn from and enjoy meeting people from different cultures. 

As for UK, yes you are right - but it has been essentially lime that for so long that it is the Britain I, and those of my ancestors that were British, grew up in over generations, with only a slow evolution. Also, arguably at least, and some will disagree, some parts of the UK may be rather too small to prosper on their own in the world, whereas Britain is large enough.

Maybe if USE were to happen over a couple of centuries, in with small steps each generation, it would go unnoticed, and I can’t say categorically that it would be a bad thing. Indeed, that is misleading, the states of Europe united where we are united in promoting peace and harmony and prosperity, and weeding out violence and intolerance poverty would in my view be a very Good Thing - so maybe that is what the EU should aspire to become, the SEU, not USE.

 

We may call it USE or SEU or whatever suitable. The process you describe as wishful, I guess, has nevertheless to begin somewhen, no? And luckily enough it already started 60+ years ago in Rome and I think we have all maintained our pecularities since then? Isn't that slow enough? Where does your fear come from you could loose your identity in the near future? Don't see that. Your folks from Wales, Scotland, Ireland etc have all experienced that you do not (have to) loose your identity over a period of hundreds of years....

You are british whether in the EU or not, but you (in the sense of the British people) have shortsightedly put in danger a process that needs to survive many generations... For what reason?

zikarus posted:

TOBYJUG posted:

People didn't vote to leave, that's the thing. 

For me, and many others, it was one week on the news that this vote was going to take place for everyone.  Almost the next week the vote was over and " everyone" had voted.   I didn't vote because in truth I didn't know what I was voting for, I didn't even know what Brexit meant as a word until after the fact. 

If it was organised that the public had a year or two to consider ? But it didn't happen like that.

Oops, that sounds a bit frightening. True? Hard to believe that such a cutting edge decision would not have been discussed for months at least. Never understood btw why it was possible that this question has been decided without an obligatory 2/3 majority at least. 

Yes, and I am aiming for that to be the case if we are to have a repeal Referendum.