Are we sleep-walking out of Europe ?

William posted:

And then we could decide the whole thing not by referendum but by a penalty shoot-out.  

And the Germans would always win. 

Zikarus thank you. I don‘t think that people in the UK really know how perplexed Europeans are that so many people England do not want to work TOGETHER with the rest of Europe. Yes maybe England should leave the UK as well!

Resurrection posted:

William posted:

And then we could decide the whole thing not by referendum but by a penalty shoot-out.  

And the Germans would always win. 

Exactly so why not join the team?

William posted:

Resurrection posted:

William posted:

And then we could decide the whole thing not by referendum but by a penalty shoot-out.  

And the Germans would always win. 

Exactly so why not join the team?

Brexit at all costs!  Because it's a matter of entrenched principle not of logic!

 

Zikarus is just a fantasy. My favourite alias might be zeromancer, but well in a forum mainly dealing with music that would be somewhat...

So your reason for the brexit is exactly what?

Your answer though is interesting as in reducing peace to weapons in the end. The strength of the EU lies indeed far beyond that. Let's call it understanding among nations. Guess thats more valuable because sustainable than the - nonetheless important - NATO. Especially since there live so many people so close together in Europe. Keeping in mind that my grandfathers were fighting against your ancestors until only 19 years before I was born it is quite amazing what had already changed until I turned 19. Remember a 10 day visit in Broadstairs with my school class that was quite enlightening.... And even 30 more years later Europe has matured even more.

The EU has its weaknesses, that need to be addressed, no doubt, but what better organisation (hope you like it this way :-) do we have? Whereelse could we (almost all European people) be forced to deal and argue with each other for a better future? What could be wrong about this?

Head back to single states? Not the right direction. I like families and family life. But hey why do the Brexiteers not consequently go down the whole route of their argumentation and fulfill their dream in making 'Little Britain' - or better little England - come true by giving up Wales etc pp? 

Ah so! When I voted in 1975 it was for the EEC and I can assure you that I would vote for that institution again. Unfortunately the original trading pact morphed into an attempted supra-national state and am afraid it is this that I despise. As someone else pointed out, there are many disparate cultures within the European continent and perhaps idealists would like to see them homogenised. Some may argue that this process is worthwhile but obviously am in violent disagreement. The integration of thousands of years of cultural separation is not going to happen no matter how peaceful that process may superficially appear. 

The Greeks, the Italian, the Portuguese have all suffered from the currency harmonisation with their economies still struggling. Nice experiment, shame about the result. A loose economic federation would probably be agreeable but not the grand, political, bureaucratic behemoth that is the EU.

Am not giving up anything as I have lived and worked in Europe and next month I will be off to Bologna for a holiday. I am a committed European but no EUrophile.

Resurrection posted:

William posted:

And then we could decide the whole thing not by referendum but by a penalty shoot-out.  

And the Germans would always win. 

Could deal with this ;-)

William posted:

And then we could decide the whole thing not by referendum but by a penalty shoot-out.  

What is the word ‘penalty’ doing in that sentence?

Innocent Bystander posted:

William posted:

And then we could decide the whole thing not by referendum but by a penalty shoot-out.  

What is the word ‘penalty’ doing in that sentence?

Yes IB, let’s cut straight to the main event! After all isn’t that what Brexit is all about. ????

William posted:

Zikarus thank you. I don‘t think that people in the UK really know how perplexed Europeans are that so many people England do not want to work TOGETHER with the rest of Europe. Yes maybe England should leave the UK as well!

But is it really so many people in England? 17.4 million in UK voted to leave, we keep being reminded by Resurrection, but that was on the back of a campaign based on a load of hype and misleading information, pedalled by activists and the gutter press, with a background of dissatisfaction with UK Government leading people to use the Brexit referendum as a tool to get at Government, and shake them, never intending it to result in a majority for Brexit. If the referendum were re-run today, with the benefit of greater knowledge, and the falsehoods of the original campaign exposed,  I doubt that much more than half that number would say “leave” (which is why Resurrection is petrified of a confirmation referendum).

I know for sure of two people, and I've not spoke to many people about Brexit, that said they voted leave as a protest vote against the Government.

 I doubt that much more than half that number would say “leave” (which is why Resurrection is petrified of a confirmation referendum).

 

Ah, what's it like in that bubble of illusion with its rarified atmosphere that keeps you high enough to live with such false hope? I don't know how many times I have to tell you, IB, once we re completely through Brexit you can go looking for your next referendum, of which I have no fear. After all, you will never reach the 66% of votes you will need to win. 

Innocent Bystander posted:

William posted:

And then we could decide the whole thing not by referendum but by a penalty shoot-out.  

What is the word ‘penalty’ doing in that sentence?

At the Westminster corral?

Resurrection posted:

 I doubt that much more than half that number would say “leave” (which is why Resurrection is petrified of a confirmation referendum).

 

Ah, what's it like in that bubble of illusion with its rarified atmosphere that keeps you high enough to live with such false hope? I don't know how many times I have to tell you, IB, once we re completely through Brexit you can go looking for your next referendum, of which I have no fear. After all, you will never reach the 66% of votes you will need to win. 

If you don’t know how many times you have said I can go looking for a referndum after Brexit, I’ll refresh your memory: none. You did mention a referendum to rejoin once or possibly twice yesterday, so maybe that is what you meant.

 do note note that you have no fear of a referendum after Brexit, indeed you said that yesterday, and I have never suggested you are - please refer to my observation on that specific matter yesterday, after you indicated that 66% would be acceptable to you as the proportion to carry a vote to rejoin - to which I note you didn’t respond.

What you clearly ARE afraid of is a confirmation referendum before actually Brexiting, and I fully understand that, because it would yield a very strong vote against Brexit, revealing the true figure wanting it to be far fewer than the 17.4 million who stuck leave on their ballot papers in after that farce of a referendum campaign.

Resurrection posted:

Oh, and I did respond to his question: left to its own devices the Erdogahs and Putins would make mincemeat of the EU. Their problem resides with NATO and its US backbone. 

Just to be a pedant... but (assuming you meant Erdoğan) Turkey is a member of NATO and has been since 1952.

Innocent Bystander posted:

Resurrection posted:

 I doubt that much more than half that number would say “leave” (which is why Resurrection is petrified of a confirmation referendum).

 

Ah, what's it like in that bubble of illusion with its rarified atmosphere that keeps you high enough to live with such false hope? I don't know how many times I have to tell you, IB, once we re completely through Brexit you can go looking for your next referendum, of which I have no fear. After all, you will never reach the 66% of votes you will need to win. 

If you don’t know how many times you have said I can go looking for a referndum after Brexit, I’ll refresh your memory: none. You did mention a referendum to rejoin once or possibly twice yesterday, so maybe that is what you meant.

 do note note that you have no fear of a referendum after Brexit, indeed you said that yesterday, and I have never suggested you are - please refer to my observation on that specific matter yesterday, after you indicated that 66% would be acceptable to you as the proportion to carry a vote to rejoin - to which I note you didn’t respond.

What you clearly ARE afraid of is a confirmation referendum before actually Brexiting, and I fully understand that, because it would yield a very strong vote against Brexit, revealing the true figure wanting it to be far fewer than the 17.4 million who stuck leave on their ballot papers in after that farce of a referendum campaign.

Stop using so many words. I’m in the pub and it’s too long and boring to read! ????

Eloise posted:

Resurrection posted:

Oh, and I did respond to his question: left to its own devices the Erdogahs and Putins would make mincemeat of the EU. Their problem resides with NATO and its US backbone. 

Just to be a pedant... but (assuming you meant Erdoğan) Turkey is a member of NATO and has been since 1952.

Yes, a complete and utter aberration!

Resurrection posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

Resurrection posted:

 I doubt that much more than half that number would say “leave” (which is why Resurrection is petrified of a confirmation referendum).

 

Ah, what's it like in that bubble of illusion with its rarified atmosphere that keeps you high enough to live with such false hope? I don't know how many times I have to tell you, IB, once we re completely through Brexit you can go looking for your next referendum, of which I have no fear. After all, you will never reach the 66% of votes you will need to win. 

If you don’t know how many times you have said I can go looking for a referndum after Brexit, I’ll refresh your memory: none. You did mention a referendum to rejoin once or possibly twice yesterday, so maybe that is what you meant.

 do note note that you have no fear of a referendum after Brexit, indeed you said that yesterday, and I have never suggested you are - please refer to my observation on that specific matter yesterday, after you indicated that 66% would be acceptable to you as the proportion to carry a vote to rejoin - to which I note you didn’t respond.

What you clearly ARE afraid of is a confirmation referendum before actually Brexiting, and I fully understand that, because it would yield a very strong vote against Brexit, revealing the true figure wanting it to be far fewer than the 17.4 million who stuck leave on their ballot papers in after that farce of a referendum campaign.

Stop using so many words. I’m in the pub and it’s too long and boring to read! ????

OK: (for more detail read last)

1. None
2. You expect  a re-entry referendum because you know how badly people will be hit
3. You really are TERRIFIED of a confirmation referendum

Innocent Bystander posted:

Resurrection posted:

 I doubt that much more than half that number would say “leave” (which is why Resurrection is petrified of a confirmation referendum).

 

Ah, what's it like in that bubble of illusion with its rarified atmosphere that keeps you high enough to live with such false hope? I don't know how many times I have to tell you, IB, once we re completely through Brexit you can go looking for your next referendum, of which I have no fear. After all, you will never reach the 66% of votes you will need to win. 

If you don’t know how many times you have said I can go looking for a referndum after Brexit, I’ll refresh your memory: none. You did mention a referendum to rejoin once or possibly twice yesterday, so maybe that is what you meant.

 do note note that you have no fear of a referendum after Brexit, indeed you said that yesterday, and I have never suggested you are - please refer to my observation on that specific matter yesterday, after you indicated that 66% would be acceptable to you as the proportion to carry a vote to rejoin - to which I note you didn’t respond.

What you clearly ARE afraid of is a confirmation referendum before actually Brexiting, and I fully understand that, because it would yield a very strong vote against Brexit, revealing the true figure wanting it to be far fewer than the 17.4 million who stuck leave on their ballot papers in after that farce of a referendum campaign.

Nope, too many words, please be more concise. My short attention span can’t handle it.

Resurrection posted:

 

...

So your reason for the brexit is exactly what?

Your answer though is interesting as in reducing peace to weapons in the end. The strength of the EU lies indeed far beyond that. Let's call it understanding among nations.  ... 

The EU has its weaknesses, that need to be addressed, no doubt, but what better organisation (hope you like it this way :-) do we have? Whereelse could we (almost all European people) be forced to deal and argue with each other for a better future? What could be wrong about this?

Head back to single states? Not the right direction. I like families and family life. But hey why do the Brexiteers not consequently go down the whole route of their argumentation and fulfill their dream in making 'Little Britain' - or better little England - come true by giving up Wales etc pp? 

Ah so! When I voted in 1975 it was for the EEC and I can assure you that I would vote for that institution again. Unfortunately the original trading pact morphed into an attempted supra-national state and am afraid it is this that I despise. As someone else pointed out, there are many disparate cultures within the European continent and perhaps idealists would like to see them homogenised. Some may argue that this process is worthwhile but obviously am in violent disagreement. The integration of thousands of years of cultural separation is not going to happen no matter how peaceful that process may superficially appear. 

The Greeks, the Italian, the Portuguese have all suffered from the currency harmonisation with their economies still struggling. Nice experiment, shame about the result. A loose economic federation would probably be agreeable but not the grand, political, bureaucratic behemoth that is the EU.

Am not giving up anything as I have lived and worked in Europe and next month I will be off to Bologna for a holiday. I am a committed European but no EUrophile.

Hmh. The struggle of some economies has many different reasons but for sure also a lot to do with an economic federation being much to loose, lacking a harmonized, EU wide tax policy for example. Let us think who opposed to the latter btw. 

Besides that I still don't understand your fear and what makes you think European people are culturally 'disparate'? Traveling through Europe you should have experienced the opposite already. And please decide yourself whether the cultures are disparate or their harmonization (or uniformity as you seem to think) at hand. Can't be both, no? 

But even that aside what would make the EU differ from GB in that respect? The only differences are size or dimension and a few hundreds of years in development. If your ancestors would have followed your thinking there wouldn't even exist a GB that you Brexiteers so desperately try to beware respectively isolate. The problem with isolation is the growing lack of understanding leading to issues that could have been prevented when staying in continuous contact instead (the more intense the better). Just take a look beyond the fence around your front yard. The list has been posted already: Trump Putin Erdogan... 

Echoes of the American political discord entering the Brexit fray. If you are hit by a particularly damaging revelation, then simply go on all out attack of your opponents on another front in order to attempt to distract from your own problems.  

I have just listened to a BBC interview (so it must have been biased or propagating fake news) with Michael Gove, where he had the audacity to claim that the "over the top" criticism of Amber Rudd & Theresa May in respect of the 'Windrush' scandal (and it is a real scandal) has been largely generated by Labour and the left in order to distract from the real scandal which according to him is anti-Semitism in the Labour party. 

Windrush is a massive and incomprehensible real scandal, and one of which I knew very little about until very recently. There can be absolutely no defence against some of the horrendous injustices that have been brought to light over the past few weeks, and the misery and uncertainty that this has caused to the many British Windrush children whose tenure in this country has been so unfairly questioned and whose lives have been thrown into turmoil.  It is absolutely unforgivable to attempt to brush the issue aside by claiming that Amber Rudd and Theresa May have gracious apologised to those affected . Theresa May, after all, initiated the underlying policies that resulted in the scandal during her term as Home Secretary.    

Shame on Michael Gove for his insinuation that the outcry about Windrush is simply as a result of Labour and the left attempting to distract from alleged anti-Semitism in the Labour party. If indeed, a small number of members in the Labour party are found to be genuinely anti-Semitic, I have no doubt they will be identified and expelled. I personally suspect that the headlines generated by the more questionable elements of the right wing press are deliberately exaggerating any real problem by conflating the two separate issues of real anti-Semitism (which is as abhorrent as any racism) and legitimate opposition to the current Israeli Government's policy in the West Bank, which is something entirely different.      

Hmack posted:

Echoes of the American political discord entering the Brexit fray. If you are hit by a particularly damaging revelation, then simply go on all out attack of your opponents on another front in order to attempt to distract from your own problems.  

I have just listened to a BBC interview (so it must have been biased or propagating fake news) with Michael Gove, where he had the audacity to claim that the "over the top" criticism of Amber Rudd & Theresa May in respect of the 'Windrush' scandal (and it is a real scandal) has been largely generated by Labour and the left in order to distract from the real scandal which according to him is anti-Semitism in the Labour party. 

Windrush is a massive and incomprehensible real scandal, and one of which I knew very little about until very recently. There can be absolutely no defence against some of the horrendous injustices that have been brought to light over the past few weeks, and the misery and uncertainty that this has caused to the many British Windrush children whose tenure in this country has been so unfairly questioned and whose lives have been thrown into turmoil.  It is absolutely unforgivable to attempt to brush the issue aside by claiming that Amber Rudd and Theresa May have gracious apologised to those affected . Theresa May, after all, initiated the underlying policies that resulted in the scandal during her term as Home Secretary.    

Shame on Michael Gove for his insinuation that the outcry about Windrush is simply as a result of Labour and the left attempting to distract from alleged anti-Semitism in the Labour party. If indeed, a small number of members in the Labour party are found to be genuinely anti-Semitic, I have no doubt they will be identified and expelled. I personally suspect that the headlines generated by the more questionable elements of the right wing press are deliberately exaggerating any real problem by conflating the two separate issues of real anti-Semitism (which is as abhorrent as any racism) and legitimate opposition to the current Israeli Government's policy in the West Bank, which is something entirely different.      

As usual I am going to court controversy. Windrush, as you rightly say, is a scandal. The scandal is a result of many politicians from both major political parties pretending to get tough with the abuses of immigration that they themselves pretend not to see by avoiding direct confrontation with the issue while pursuing their own agendas whatever they are or were as I have yet to hear a comprehensible definition of what immigration this country really needs or how it is to be controlled and policed properly.

Back to Windrush which, as I say, is a bureaucratic bungle possibly partially perpetrated by a malicious Home Office and or Border Force. Due to targets, malformed legislation, mischief and spite we have a lovely big scandal. However, bureaucratic bungles happen all the time in every country round the world. That bungling may be an inconvenience e.g. a passport request processed too late for you to take that holiday, or it may be the misplacing of medical files resulting in your early demise. You may hold a hierarchy of bureaucratic bungles and how they should be treated but Windrush being exploited for political purposes I find quite distasteful.

We cannot have mass immigration into this country which is a huge political hot potato with  everything being managed by nudges, winks, no structure and all responsibility being avoided by politicians of all hues. 

Resurrection strikes again!

Resurrection posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

Resurrection posted:

 I doubt that much more than half that number would say “leave” (which is why Resurrection is petrified of a confirmation referendum).

 

Ah, what's it like in that bubble of illusion with its rarified atmosphere that keeps you high enough to live with such false hope? I don't know how many times I have to tell you, IB, once we re completely through Brexit you can go looking for your next referendum, of which I have no fear. After all, you will never reach the 66% of votes you will need to win. 

If you don’t know how many times you have said I can go looking for a referndum after Brexit, I’ll refresh your memory: none. You did mention a referendum to rejoin once or possibly twice yesterday, so maybe that is what you meant.

 do note note that you have no fear of a referendum after Brexit, indeed you said that yesterday, and I have never suggested you are - please refer to my observation on that specific matter yesterday, after you indicated that 66% would be acceptable to you as the proportion to carry a vote to rejoin - to which I note you didn’t respond.

What you clearly ARE afraid of is a confirmation referendum before actually Brexiting, and I fully understand that, because it would yield a very strong vote against Brexit, revealing the true figure wanting it to be far fewer than the 17.4 million who stuck leave on their ballot papers in after that farce of a referendum campaign.

Nope, too many words, please be more concise. My short attention span can’t handle it.

Odd aberration, isn’t it: your attention span manages long diatribes spouting ridiculous dogma, but can’t cope when reading something that requires you to recognise facts.

Innocent Bystander posted:

Resurrection posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

Resurrection posted:

 I doubt that much more than half that number would say “leave” (which is why Resurrection is petrified of a confirmation referendum).

 

Ah, what's it like in that bubble of illusion with its rarified atmosphere that keeps you high enough to live with such false hope? I don't know how many times I have to tell you, IB, once we re completely through Brexit you can go looking for your next referendum, of which I have no fear. After all, you will never reach the 66% of votes you will need to win. 

If you don’t know how many times you have said I can go looking for a referndum after Brexit, I’ll refresh your memory: none. You did mention a referendum to rejoin once or possibly twice yesterday, so maybe that is what you meant.

 do note note that you have no fear of a referendum after Brexit, indeed you said that yesterday, and I have never suggested you are - please refer to my observation on that specific matter yesterday, after you indicated that 66% would be acceptable to you as the proportion to carry a vote to rejoin - to which I note you didn’t respond.

What you clearly ARE afraid of is a confirmation referendum before actually Brexiting, and I fully understand that, because it would yield a very strong vote against Brexit, revealing the true figure wanting it to be far fewer than the 17.4 million who stuck leave on their ballot papers in after that farce of a referendum campaign.

Nope, too many words, please be more concise. My short attention span can’t handle it.

Odd aberration, isn’t it: your attention span manages long diatribes spouting ridiculous dogma, but can’t cope when reading something that requires you to recognise facts.

I was in the pub at the time and my attention was focused on foamier things! Now, what were you saying...................?

Oh yes, it was a cut and paste of everything you have said before. I did respond to the Referendum question and did say that post real Brexit you can, should Parliament say so, have another referendum as long as you get 66% of the vote to b able to rejoin the EU (spit!). Might not have been you you directly, but I did say it and this is at least the third time. And you are right, I have no interest or desire for your confirmation Referendum and never will.

Windrush is not a bureaucratic bungle for which officials are to blame, as quite a number of Conservatives are trying to present it. Officials don't make policy, ministers do.  This debacle is simply a manifestation of the policy designed and driven by the former Home Secretary. The climate created in the Home Office and Border Force of targets has been driven by the former Home Secretary and her two former close advisors.  This climate involved regular reports against those targets being reported up to ministers. What seems to embarrass the government today is that this pernicious policy and the measures to enforce it have impacted on some people that are here legally and has become very public, leaving many people uncomfortable with the policy and measures that have been applied that were mostly hidden from view.

The irony is that many people apparently voted for Brexit because they wanted to 'take back control of our borders' and now seemingly don't like to be made aware of what this entails in terms of the actions that the Home Office undertake.   And, of course, it casts considerable doubt on all the assurances being given by ministers about EU citizens already in the UK being treated fairly. Can this government really be trusted to honour those assurances? is a question that I imagine is being asked by many of the people affected and EU negotiators.    

Resurrection posted:

Hmack posted:

Echoes of the American political discord entering the Brexit fray. If you are hit by a particularly damaging revelation, then simply go on all out attack of your opponents on another front in order to attempt to distract from your own problems.  

I have just listened to a BBC interview (so it must have been biased or propagating fake news) with Michael Gove, where he had the audacity to claim that the "over the top" criticism of Amber Rudd & Theresa May in respect of the 'Windrush' scandal (and it is a real scandal) has been largely generated by Labour and the left in order to distract from the real scandal which according to him is anti-Semitism in the Labour party. 

Windrush is a massive and incomprehensible real scandal, and one of which I knew very little about until very recently. There can be absolutely no defence against some of the horrendous injustices that have been brought to light over the past few weeks, and the misery and uncertainty that this has caused to the many British Windrush children whose tenure in this country has been so unfairly questioned and whose lives have been thrown into turmoil.  It is absolutely unforgivable to attempt to brush the issue aside by claiming that Amber Rudd and Theresa May have gracious apologised to those affected . Theresa May, after all, initiated the underlying policies that resulted in the scandal during her term as Home Secretary.    

Shame on Michael Gove for his insinuation that the outcry about Windrush is simply as a result of Labour and the left attempting to distract from alleged anti-Semitism in the Labour party. If indeed, a small number of members in the Labour party are found to be genuinely anti-Semitic, I have no doubt they will be identified and expelled. I personally suspect that the headlines generated by the more questionable elements of the right wing press are deliberately exaggerating any real problem by conflating the two separate issues of real anti-Semitism (which is as abhorrent as any racism) and legitimate opposition to the current Israeli Government's policy in the West Bank, which is something entirely different.      

As usual I am going to court controversy. Windrush, as you rightly say, is a scandal. The scandal is a result of many politicians from both major political parties pretending to get tough with the abuses of immigration that they themselves pretend not to see by avoiding direct confrontation with the issue while pursuing their own agendas whatever they are or were as I have yet to hear a comprehensible definition of what immigration this country really needs or how it is to be controlled and policed properly.

Back to Windrush which, as I say, is a bureaucratic bungle possibly partially perpetrated by a malicious Home Office and or Border Force. Due to targets, malformed legislation, mischief and spite we have a lovely big scandal. However, bureaucratic bungles happen all the time in every country round the world. That bungling may be an inconvenience e.g. a passport request processed too late for you to take that holiday, or it may be the misplacing of medical files resulting in your early demise. You may hold a hierarchy of bureaucratic bungles and how they should be treated but Windrush being exploited for political purposes I find quite distasteful.

We cannot have mass immigration into this country which is a huge political hot potato with  everything being managed by nudges, winks, no structure and all responsibility being avoided by politicians of all hues. 

Resurrection strikes again!

Regarding wind rush, J don’t believe it was fundamentally political, but that the existence of anomalous situations as was the case with those particular immigrants was simply forgotten in the incompetence bred from countless cost cutting of the civil service departments responsible, exacerbated by knee-jerk political reactions caused by the existence of party politics and its pettiness, imposing ill-thought out or researched policies and targets so as to attempt to score points in parliament. And that is all parties over the years, not just one in particular.

as for immigration, suggesting it is undesirable is off: after all, Britain is a country of immigrants - just look back in time. I agree that excessive immigration is unsustainable and so control may be needed to prevent that, however IIRC the birth rate of what might be considered to be the indigenous population (whatever that is, is such that population will contract if there is no net immigration. Maybe that is a good thing, though for how long? WhT is the right size population for the UK? And how do you ensure the right availability of skills?