Thread: The U.K and the E.U - In or out?

Originally Posted by can123

I will be voting to leave the EEU because I do not like being ruled by French, Germans, etc. Those who like to be ruled by the French and the Germans should bugger off to France or Germany.

Originally Posted by longway

its no secret that the ultimate goal of the eu is a federal style superstate

Trade and politics have always been intertwined and political integration has always been a part of the EU. The UK has a representative number of MEPs and I don't see what the big fuss is about with loss of Sovereignty...We still managed to bugger ourselves quite happily by entering the Iraq war.

The irony is that the UK are far more likely to be ruled by the French and Germans if they leave the EU that they are within it.

I take it you would both have the UK leave without an EU FTA and go back to WTO import duty rules whilst negotiating separate FTAs. Any other solution would likely require conforming to EU regulations, EU freedom of movement and a subscription fee but no 10% voting power.

Immigration seems to be the main issue for Brexit, but the UK requires cheap labour to stay competitive and will get them from somewhere, The high percentage of skilled labour coming from the EU will be removed; i.e., the ones paying into the UK tax system and NIS to pay for your pensions.

For you people still believing in the EU, after everything that has gone on in the last 10 years has it still not dawned on you it is a failed concept. How can you possibly have one rule for all when you have such differnent economies and ways of life, it was always going to fail with the intergration of political union against the wishes of the citizens in most countries.

Anti EU parties in near enough all countries are gaining a larger % of the vote year by year, it's only a matter of time before it all collapses.

And all this bollox about trade, does anyone actually believe that countries will stop trading with the worlds 6th largest economy if they leave the EU. And as to attracting labour as required for skilled or unskilled work another red herring, people can just apply for work permits/visas as those currently outside the EU have to do.

Britain leaves and flourishes and the whole EU project is over as countries will be scrambling to follow Britains lead.

Originally Posted by Troy

Originally Posted by can123

I will be voting to leave the EEU because I do not like being ruled by French, Germans, etc. Those who like to be ruled by the French and the Germans should bugger off to France or Germany.

Originally Posted by longway

its no secret that the ultimate goal of the eu is a federal style superstate

Trade and politics have always been intertwined and political integration has always been a part of the EU. The UK has a representative number of MEPs and I don't see what the big fuss is about with loss of Sovereignty...We still managed to bugger ourselves quite happily by entering the Iraq war.

The irony is that the UK are far more likely to be ruled by the French and Germans if they leave the EU that they are within it.

I take it you would both have the UK leave without an EU FTA and go back to WTO import duty rules whilst negotiating separate FTAs. Any other solution would likely require conforming to EU regulations, EU freedom of movement and a subscription fee but no 10% voting power.

Immigration seems to be the main issue for Brexit, but the UK requires cheap labour to stay competitive and will get them from somewhere, The high percentage of skilled labour coming from the EU will be removed; i.e., the ones paying into the UK tax system and NIS to pay for your pensions.

Loss of sovereignty may not be a big thing for you, but it is for me.

You also have a rather banal view of most of the other issues. You have some points, but its not cut and dried as you think.

Yes wto rules on that point, there isn't any other option is there?

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Originally Posted by hazz

leave or stay we will have the same problems, because the root cause is our own civil servants and the politicians that control them.

Agree in part. The upper echelons of the civil service is where the real graft and corruption is hidden. There should be a mandatory list of "declared interests" for all civil servants.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Would that include the 17 million British voters who voted "yes" in the 1975 referendum?

No - because people were voting on what they thought was a "trade deal" when in reality, the people posing the question knew is was about creating a United States of Europe. .

The "ever closer union" thing? That's ALWAYS been in in there. The EEC was NEVER solely a "trade deal". You are either deliberately lying or, more likely, have not bothered to learn anything about either th EEC or the EU and Britains membership of it. I remember quite clearly, although I was very young, the 1973 ascension and the 75 referendum and the trade deal aspect was unimportant for most.

At that time, less than 30 years after the end of the war, it was more about creating a united Europe that would never descend into war again.

Originally Posted by longway

Loss of sovereignty may not be a big thing for you, but it is for me.

Where are you King of, Your Majesty ?

the difference between sovereign and sovereignty, one to the many things Bob the knob doesnt have a clue about.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Originally Posted by hazz

leave or stay we will have the same problems, because the root cause is our own civil servants and the politicians that control them.

Agree in part. The upper echelons of the civil service is where the real graft and corruption is hidden. There should be a mandatory list of "declared interests" for all civil servants.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Would that include the 17 million British voters who voted "yes" in the 1975 referendum?

No - because people were voting on what they thought was a "trade deal" when in reality, the people posing the question knew is was about creating a United States of Europe. .

The "ever closer union" thing? That's ALWAYS been in in there. The EEC was NEVER solely a "trade deal". You are either deliberately lying or, more likely, have not bothered to learn anything about either th EEC or the EU and Britains membership of it. I remember quite clearly, although I was very young, the 1973 ascension and the 75 referendum and the trade deal aspect was unimportant for most.

At that time, less than 30 years after the end of the war, it was more about creating a united Europe that would never descend into war again.

Pile of crap as usual.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Originally Posted by hazz

leave or stay we will have the same problems, because the root cause is our own civil servants and the politicians that control them.

Agree in part. The upper echelons of the civil service is where the real graft and corruption is hidden. There should be a mandatory list of "declared interests" for all civil servants.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Would that include the 17 million British voters who voted "yes" in the 1975 referendum?

No - because people were voting on what they thought was a "trade deal" when in reality, the people posing the question knew is was about creating a United States of Europe. .

The "ever closer union" thing? That's ALWAYS been in in there. The EEC was NEVER solely a "trade deal". You are either deliberately lying or, more likely, have not bothered to learn anything about either th EEC or the EU and Britains membership of it. I remember quite clearly, although I was very young, the 1973 ascension and the 75 referendum and the trade deal aspect was unimportant for most.

At that time, less than 30 years after the end of the war, it was more about creating a united Europe that would never descend into war again.

Sheep will vote for the farmer... A solid front from the leaders of the reds and blues saying Remain, and thus all the cap doffers dutifully voted that way as well. You are clearly the exception, because you are highly intelligent. I would guess that in a Socratic assumption that most people did not have a clue especially as all they had to go on was the BBC's neutral voice.

I noticed that the FT is a tad biased and scared too

The FT has become the Daily Mail of the Europhile elite



An enjoyable aspect of the EU referendum campaign is the nervous condition of the Financial Times. Unable to maintain its usual pretence at judicious balance under the strain, it has become the Daily Mail of the Europhile global elites, warning of the Seven Plagues which will afflict us if we vote to leave. Rather as the Mail loves the headline beginning ‘Just why…?’, so the FT all-purpose referendum headline begins ‘Fears mount…’
Its star columnists like Philip Stephens and Janan Ganesh pour withering scorn on Eurosceptic ‘nostalgists’ and bigots. Although they — and most of the paper’s writers — are highly intelligent, it does not occur to them to take seriously arguments which, in other contexts, they would mind about, like the age-old question of who exercises power on behalf of whom. They do not realise, to adapt Matthew Arnold, that the sea of EU faith was ‘once, too, at the full’, but now isn’t. Their cries are part of its melancholy, long, withdrawing roar.
This is an extract from Charles Moore’s notes. The full article is available here.

One for the Lefties..

George Galloway: Why I'm backing Brexit

The left-wing firebrand and former MP said the UK should be able to decide for itself "how many immigrants we have, who we deport, what the levels of taxation are and what our foreign policy should be".

But he insisted he would be making a "left case" for Brexit, despite being on the same side of the EU debate as noted right-wingers like Nigel Farage, Peter Bone and Sir Bill Cash.

He told the BBC's Sunday Politics: "I campaigned against breaking up Britain; I campaigned for a No vote in the Scottish referendum. That didn't mean I was with the Tories or the Orange Order.

Mr Galloway, who is standing as the Respect party candidate to be London Mayor, said the EU is "built on neo-liberal economic principles which are iron-clad and unchangeable".

However, he argued people want to vote and only Brexit would deliver true democracy for British voters.

He said: "We want our people to choose our government and thus our direction. I'd rather take my chance with changing things in Britain than waiting for change in Bulgaria or in Poland or in Germany.

"The people of Greece were crushed underfoot by this neo-liberal consensus on which the EU and its main institutions are built.

"Portugal actually elected a majority of left-wing MPs and the president of Portugal was told by the European Union 'you mustn't summon these people to your palace and ask them to form a government'.

Mr Galloway added: "This is unconscionable. I don't want us to suffer the same fate as them."



https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk...backing-brexit

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Originally Posted by OhOh

Democracy is legislation, with, the will of the people. Not legislation by an unelected body, accepted freely or with reservations by "here today gone tomorrow" politicians and imposed on the unwilling citizens.

Don't agree - sorry mate. Democracy is legislation thought up and enacted by a group of people supposedly representing the views of the largest minority of voters. We really need to drop the concept of DEMOCRACY because it never works.

The question over the EU is very simple. Are the individuals who signed the UK into the EU, at all and various stages, guilty of treason or high treason? The answer is categorically yes. I have said this before, and no doubt will say this again. The UK is a constitutional monarchy. We are not a democracy. We have a constitution and a bill of rights, and the monarch is appointed to the position as Crown to ensure that no laws or statutes are enacted that contravene or impede upon the inalienable rights vested to the people of the UK by the constitution and bill of rights.

In signing up to the EU, at all stages, not least because even as far back as Winston Churchill days in No 10 in the early 1950's he knew that the plan was to create a united states of Europe, emulating the USA model, which by the way he was passionately in favour of (laughable when you see the BRexit Campaigners using his image in their material). From the very off, all politicians and governments knew this was about signing away independence, and allowing laws into effect in the nation that might or might not impact the constitution and bill of rights. The EU Bill of Human Rights is a very good case in point. As Brits, we do not need this. We also do not need any imaged bill of rights that the camerons or what have yo think they would like to give us. We have inalienable rights - not rights GIVEN to us at the whim of politicians whether in westminster of brussels. What they give, they can take away. The point is it is not theirs to give in the first place, so they can not take it. As a reminder, any trial that has gone so far that the magna carta or the bill of rights have been tested, those two ALWAYS prevail.

The queen has accepted mediatisation, is in abuse of office, and a new monarch needs to be appointed and told again what their JOB is. Any politician who has negotiated, agreed to or signed any treaty with the EU is basically a traitor, and could be charged with treason. If you take it to a logical extent, the UK is not actually in the EU at all because none of the people who signed the various treaties actually have the authority to do so.

Chris Story's idea is the simplest though. Ask for the completed audited account from them - all of them. As they can not provide these, that makes them a criminal organisation under EU law. Then, as EU Laws says you are not allowed to send funds to criminal or unlawful more aptly, organisations, stop paying them. Then under EU law you can get back all the money they have received under false pretenses. All using EU law against the EU.

The other route you can use is documenting the above information, putting it into a letter to any MP who thinks they are in favour of the EU remain campaign, and asking that once they know the above, can they explain to you why they should not be held for abuse of office if they engage with a criminal organisation and in treasonous activity. Even supporting the Remain campaign is aiding and abetting individuals in the course of a crime.

So there it is. This can also be used for fighting TTIP - as all aspects of that is highly treasonous. Its about bloody time we help this corrupt party politicing whip responding grubby career politicians to account, sling them on abuse of office charges and put the fuckers in prison.

Originally Posted by blue

if its all about trade why did they change its name from the Common Market ?

See above - it was never about trade, it was the old standard frog in a boiling pot routine. Slowly slowly, little by little, but the end result was planned a long time ago. Having been away from Europe for 8 years, then returning, it is stunning the changes and the grasp the EU has on the UK and other countries now. Staggering. People who have lived here though do not see the changes due to the incremental way that they have been introduced.

Originally Posted by longway

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Originally Posted by hazz

leave or stay we will have the same problems, because the root cause is our own civil servants and the politicians that control them.

Agree in part. The upper echelons of the civil service is where the real graft and corruption is hidden. There should be a mandatory list of "declared interests" for all civil servants.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Would that include the 17 million British voters who voted "yes" in the 1975 referendum?

No - because people were voting on what they thought was a "trade deal" when in reality, the people posing the question knew is was about creating a United States of Europe. .

The "ever closer union" thing? That's ALWAYS been in in there. The EEC was NEVER solely a "trade deal". You are either deliberately lying or, more likely, have not bothered to learn anything about either th EEC or the EU and Britains membership of it. I remember quite clearly, although I was very young, the 1973 ascension and the 75 referendum and the trade deal aspect was unimportant for most.

At that time, less than 30 years after the end of the war, it was more about creating a united Europe that would never descend into war again.

Pile of crap as usual.

Do you and Piwanoi spend a lot of time in his shed touching each others tonkers?

^ alzheimer's disease is a sad condition.

Excerpt from the 1975 Referendum pamphlet explaining sovereignty:

WILL PARLIAMENT
LOSE ITS POWER?
Another anxiety expressed about Britain's membership of the Common Market is that Parliament could lose its supremacy, and we would have to obey laws passed by unelected 'faceless bureaucrats' sitting in their headquarters in Brussels.
What are the facts?

Fact No. 1 is that in the modern world even the Super Powers like America and Russia do not have complete freedom of action. Medium-sized nations like Britain are more and more subject to economic and political forces we cannot control on our own.
A striking recent example of the impact of such forces is the way the Arab oil-producing nations brought about an energy and financial crisis not only in Britain but throughout a great part of the world.
Since we cannot go it alone in the modern world, Britain has for years been a member of international groupings like the United Nations, NATO and the International Monetary Fund.
Membership of such groupings imposes both rights and duties, but has not deprived us of our national identity, or changed our way of life.
Membership of the Common Market also imposes new rights and duties on Britain, but does not deprive us of our national identity. To say that membership could force Britain to eat Euro-bread or drink Euro-beer is nonsense.

Fact No. 2. No important new policy can be decided in Brussels or anywhere else without the consent of a British Minister answerable to a British Government and British Parliament.
The top decision-making body in the Market is the Council of Ministers, which is composed of senior Ministers representing each of the nine member governments.
It is the Council of Ministers, and not the market's officials, who take the important decisions. These decisions can be taken only if all the members of the Council agree. The Minister representing Britain can veto any proposal for a new law or a new tax if he considers it to be against British interests. Ministers from the other Governments have the same right to veto.
All the nine member countries also agree that any changes or additions to the Market Treaties must be acceptable to their own Governments and Parliaments.
Remember: All the other countries in the Market today enjoy, like us, democratically elected Governments answerable to their own Parliaments and their own voters. They do not want to weaken their Parliaments any more than we would."

Fact No. 3. The British Parliament in Westminster retains the final right to repeal the Act which took us into the Market on January 1, 1973. Thus our continued membership will depend on the continuing assent of Parliament.
The White Paper on the new Market terms recently presented to Parliament by the Prime Minister declares that through membership of the Market we are better able to advance and protect our national interests. This is the essence of sovereignty.

Fact No. 4. On April 9, 1975, the House of Commons voted by 396 to 170 in favour of staying in on the new terms.
[Link to the table of contents]

1975 Referendum pamphlet
...

I still haven't heard a united solution from Brexit campaigners, no viable alternative. It is all just hand waving, headless chicken: "Get out! Get Out! rhetoric. People jumping on little details and extrapolating them into major issues...issues that leaving the EU will probably not fix anyway.

...and stop confusing fear with commonsense.

Today’s shock leak of the text of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) marks the beginning of the end for the hated EU-US trade deal, and a key moment in the Brexit debate. The unelected negotiators have kept the talks going until now by means of a fanatical level of secrecy, with threats of criminal prosecution for anyone divulging the treaty’s contents.

Now, for the first time, the people of Europe can see for themselves what the European Commission has been doing under cover of darkness - and it is not pretty.

The leaked TTIP documents, published by Greenpeace this morning, run to 248 pages and cover 13 of the 17 chapters where the final agreement has begun to take shape. The texts include highly controversial subjects such as EU food safety standards, already known to be at risk from TTIP, as well as details of specific threats such as the US plan to end Europe’s ban on genetically modified foods.


READ MORE
UK Parliament 'would not be able to stop NHS sell-off under TTIP'
The documents show that US corporations will be granted unprecedented powers over any new public health or safety regulations to be introduced in future. If any European government does dare to bring in laws to raise social or environmental standards, TTIP will grant US investors the right to sue for loss of profits in their own corporate court system that is unavailable to domestic firms, governments or anyone else.

For all those who said that we were scaremongering and that the EU would never allow this to happen, we were right and you were wrong.

The leaked texts also reveal how the European Commission is preparing to open up the European economy to unfair competition from giant US corporations, despite acknowledging the disastrous consequences this will bring to European producers, who have to meet far higher standards than pertain in the USA.

According to official statistics, at least one million jobs will be lost as a direct result of TTIP – and twice that many if the full deal is allowed to go through. Yet we can now see that EU negotiators are preparing to trade away whole sectors of our economies in TTIP, with no care for the human consequences.

The European Commission slapped a 30-year ban on public access to the TTIP negotiating texts at the beginning of the talks in 2013, in the full knowledge that they would not be able to survive the outcry if people were given sight of the deal. In response, campaigners called for a ‘Dracula strategy’ against the agreement: expose the vampire to sunlight and it will die. Today the door has been flung open and the first rays of sunlight shone on TTIP. The EU negotiators will never be able to crawl back into the shadows again.

The leak of the TTIP text comes at a time when senior politicians across Europe have already begun to distance themselves from the increasingly toxic deal. President Hollande announced this weekend that France will veto any TTIP agreement that could endanger the country’s agricultural sector. Germany’s economy minister Sigmar Gabriel has also spoken publicly of TTIP collapsing, and has pointed the finger at US intransigence as the cause. When politicians start playing the blame game in this way, you know they are already preparing their exit strategies. The writing is on the wall.

For those of us in the thick of the EU referendum debate, the contempt shown by the TTIP negotiators to the people of Europe is the most potent reminder of the democratic deficit at the heart of the EU institutions. Today’s leak of the TTIP text leaves the leaders of the European Union with a choice. Either they abandon the TTIP negotiations immediately or they risk seeing the entire European project come crashing down about their ears. They have until 23rd June to decide.

After the leaks today showing just what it really stands for, this could be the end for TTIP | Voices | The Independent

Originally Posted by Chittychangchang

UK Parliament 'would not be able to stop NHS sell-off under TTIP

As the Government is selling it off right now anyway what difference would it make?

Cuba had all their shit sold off too, by Fulgencio Batista etc
The indigenous people got it all back in the end and so will will -
one way or another

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Originally Posted by Chittychangchang

UK Parliament 'would not be able to stop NHS sell-off under TTIP

As the Government is selling it off right now anyway what difference would it make?

the eurofool argument

previous position - we are fucked if we leave, so we should stay

current position - we are fucked no matter what we do, so we should stay

useless drivel.

Originally Posted by longway

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Originally Posted by Chittychangchang

UK Parliament 'would not be able to stop NHS sell-off under TTIP

As the Government is selling it off right now anyway what difference would it make?

the eurofool argument

previous position - we are fucked if we leave, so we should stay

current position - we are fucked no matter what we do, so we should stay

useless drivel.

You are really, really bad at comprehension, aren't you? Every reply you make just makes you look more and more stupid. Here's a hint, when you've finished typing just put your hands behind your back and read your reply to see if it has anything to do with what you think you're replying to, In the 98% of cases where it doesn't re-read the post you're replying to until you actually understand what is being said. Don't sweat it too much as by the time you reach the stage of understanding any post several decades will have passed, the world will have moved on, the issue will be no longer relevant and you will be long dead.

Originally Posted by blue

Cuba had all their shit sold off too, by Fulgencio Batista etc
The indigenous people got it all back in the end and so will will -
one way or another

Good to see you're starting to see the benefit of beardy leftist leaders, comrade!



Warning!!! Danger!!! Do not trust lefty leaders with no beard!!!

My EU Ref voting postal form has arrived.



Refreshingly honest for a change. Mind you, if voting or referendums made any difference, the owners of the world wouldn't allow us to do it. Unless they control the outcome or ignore it when it is beyond their control

Originally Posted by longway

a) Not sure what you are trying to show with this article,

It is not an article, it is a excerpt from the 1975 referendum pamphlet distributed to every household in the UK at the time.

I can only take so much 'stupid' in a week, so you'll have to wait until next week for a reply to your post. With luck, you will have understood your failings in comprehension by then.

Originally Posted by Troy

It is not an article, it is a excerpt from the 1975 referendum pamphlet distributed to every household in the UK at the time.

Don't do yourself down Troy. If you don't like being stupid all the time, take a break from it.

Quoting anything from the referendum in 1975, and using that to make believe that people were voting to progress to an USofEurope is ridiculous. As the pamphlet you yourself posted shows.

^ Another one that thinks the UK is the way it is now due to the EU. The closest I have come to being back in 1960's UK is in....Europe. Leaving the EU will NOT solve any of the problems you think it will solve...it will simply add to them!

Originally Posted by Troy

^ Another one that thinks the UK is the way it is now due to the EU. The closest I have come to being back in 1960's UK is in....Europe. Leaving the EU will NOT solve any of the problems you think it will solve...it will simply add to them!

No I don't. I don't think the UK is actually in that bad a position right now, despite the absolute bollocks written in the right wing rags, and the responses to that in the left wing corporate owned rags, using immigrants as a bogey man as a fit all response to everything. The only chance the UK has of not being annexed by TTIP is out of the EU, and then straight away to attack the corrupts MPs in the UK to stop it that way. To remain in the EU, despite the French missives recently about blocking it, they will vote for it as will every other bugger there. So it will pass. BREXIT mps are all pro TTIP as well.

We didn't need a referendum - I think it is being used, of course, nefariously. Vote remain, we will be in the EURO itself in the not too distant future being told "well, you voted for it". Vote Leave, catastrophic attack on the british economy and pound will follow, signed up to TTIP with King Boris crowned and using that to say "See, I told you we could negotiate trade deals quickly". Massive recession / depression after that will see the populace begging to go back in, which will happen on condition that we accept the Euro - all or nothing.

This is no win situation for the people of Britain, and I reckon that even the Remain politicians are trying to get the exit vote, being so clumsy and stupid that they are making fools of themselves.

But basically, now the referendum has be called, it has to be Exit, but then stop the pre-planned follow on from that. General election and get rid of the tories.