Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It will be interesting to hear what Sir William Cash says in response to Scottish reps when a similar speech is made about Scotland leaving the UK. In my view Cash is prone to exaggerate the ills of the EU, to take anything that is not perfect and amplify it. The exact same can be done for any government in the world, including Westminster.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 18.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • jack_sparrow

    7717

  • LeoV

    2349

  • Waynemarlow

    1967

  • mad

    1399

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I was thinking for the last few days that  as a pro union lifelong Alliance voter I should respond to this post but turning on the radio this morning and hearing Mike Nesbitt made me decide to act.

No way I'm going to PA. This was a top thread, now it's fucked. Thank you fucking idiots.

Umm, that would be you.  1) You are fool (as is both evident and self-confessed) who thinks that brexit is a good idea.  2) You post nonsense that only reinforces this and believe that you a

Posted Images

34 minutes ago, Bruce Hudson said:

It will be interesting to hear what Sir William Cash says 

In actual fact it will probably be pretty dull, yet having said that it will still be a thousand fold more interesting than anything you have ever said. Bruce you should step away from the key board, put some clothes on, walk upstairs from the basement, kiss your mum goodbye and go out and try to meet some women. If you do manage somehow to engage in a conversation with a women, for once try listening to what someone else has to say rather than just spewing endless words yourself. You still won't get a root but the sunlight should give you some much needed vitamin D.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/19/2019 at 1:38 AM, jgh66 said:

Just to remind you how and why, and which political party joined the EU... 

EU roots and British accession (1957–1973)Edit

The UK was not a signatory of the three original treaties that were incorporated into what was then the European Communities, including the most well known of these, the 1957 Treaty of Rome, establishing the European Economic Community (EEC). Britain first began talks to join the EEC in July 1961.[1] The UK's applications to join in 1963 and 1967 were vetoed by the President of France, Charles de Gaulle, who said that "a number of aspects of Britain's economy, from working practices to agriculture" had "made Britain incompatible with Europe" and that Britain harboured a "deep-seated hostility" to any pan-European project.[2]

Once de Gaulle had relinquished the French presidency in 1969, the UK made a third and successful application for membership. By this time attitudes to Britain joining the EEC had shifted in political and business circles in both the UK and France: by the late 1960s exports from Britain to western Europe outstripped those to countries participating in Imperial Preference and British investment in the EEC was faster than that going to the Commonwealth. Large firms in advanced manufacturing became increasingly vocal advocates of joining the EEC, and the Confederation of British Industry, whose predecessor the Federation of British Industries had originally opposed the establishment of a European customs union after World War II, stressed the importance of pan-European investment, collaboration and coordinated industrial policy. In France, government and business opinion were increasingly aware that American firms were dominating high-tech sectors and were better at organising integrated production networks in Europe than local companies, in part due to the fragmentation of European businesses, as argued by Jean-Jacques Servan-Schreiber in his 1967 book Le défi américain. In response, senior French civil servants and the country's main employer's organisation, the Conseil national du patronat français, lobbied to reverse de Gaulle's policy regarding British membership.[3]

The question of sovereignty had been discussed at the time in an official Foreign and Commonwealth Office document. It listed among "Areas of policy in which parliamentary freedom to legislate will be affected by entry into the European Communities": Customs duties, Agriculture, Free movement of labour, services and capital, Transport, and Social Security for migrant workers. The document concluded (paragraph 26) that it was advisable to put the considerations of influence and power before those of formal sovereignty.[4]

The Treaty of Accession was signed in January 1972 by the then prime minister Edward Heath, leader of the Conservative Party.[5] Parliament's European Communities Act 1972 was enacted on 17 October, and the UK's instrument of ratification was deposited the next day (18 October),[6] letting the United Kingdom's membership of the EC come into effect on 1 January 1973

Given how central the Treaty of Accession is to the Brexit argument, the above is the only mention of it in this thread. Article 50 is not mentioned at all.

Fascinating that the case for Brexit has not been made in this way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Bruce Hudson said:

Given how central the Treaty of Accession is to the Brexit argument, the above is the only mention of it in this thread. Article 50 is not mentioned at all.

Fascinating that the case for Brexit has not been made in this way.

Maybe Bruce you should go read this thread from the beginning that was transported to PA. There is around 13K posts there in WTF up to last month when this WTF2 started....that should keep you busy for a while. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jack_sparrow said:

Maybe Bruce you should go read this thread from the beginning that was transported to PA. There is around 13K posts there up to last month....that should keep you busy for a while.

 

 

 

Thanks, will do. :) 

(My primary interest is misinformation/disinformation, and those who peddle it. With Brexit, there are rich pickings. In the background, I have a long interest in International Trade and Trade Agreements.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Don't rush..take your time.

Don't worry, I shall both take my time and won't let my reading of it prevent me from posting here.

---

Fascinating that Tom Walker thinks Brexit is sooooo boring, yet has presented entertaining points and salient points on this thread. :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, The Q said:

The international border between two adjoining countries is an extension of the Land border between those countries . Where does that put the Glengorm field?

Even after what the slippery bastards nicked .... (another story), Glengorm is NW of Elgin / Franklin

seamap1 460x457

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Don't rush..take your time.

 

5 hours ago, Bruce Hudson said:

Don't worry, I shall both take my time and won't let my reading of it prevent me from posting here.

OK .umm..there is also @mad Brexit thread in PA too...like it would be premature to rush back here unless you are up to speed.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

I think I detected a wheeze?

I didn't know over 10K of posts in one thread on one subject by one poster who as time runs on, seems to get it wrong on a consistent basis, was a wheeze.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bruce Hudson said:

Given how central the Treaty of Accession is to the Brexit argument, the above is the only mention of it in this thread. Article 50 is not mentioned at all.

Fascinating that the case for Brexit has not been made in this way.

However we have discussed the Treaty of the European Union (TEU) and the Treaty of Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and their predecessors (Maastricht and Lisbon) ....perhaps because we knew they had long since supplanted the Accession Treaty .

Can I suggest reading the TEU to get up to speed:

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:2bf140bf-a3f8-4ab2-b506-fd71826e6da6.0023.02/DOC_1&format=PDF

You will observe that Article 50 which you refer to is, in fact, Article 50 of the TEU.....which we have discussed in depth in the WTF thread including the judgement of the ECJ with regard to the case brought in Scotland. The judgement confirmed a nation's right to unilaterally revoke article 50, which was of significant interest at one stage in the Brexit process but is now largely irrelevant. Article 50 is not going to be revoked.

The discussion is now largely focused on the negotiations which will start in January with regard to the relations between the EU and the UK after the transition period.  The Treat of Accession, while interesting to historians, will have zero impact on those negotiations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Watch very last moment... fucking weird.

 

 

Nothing weird. The international language for KMA.

What is interesting is that BJ has a temper streak,,,,he was was provoked and succumbed in front of a camera.

Same guy who fired longstanding Conservative MPs for not toeing the line in a vote he was going to lose anyway. 

I would like to be a fly on the wall in the cabinet room when someone dares to disagree with him. I just hope there are 2 keys to the UK's nuclear button.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Tory Telegraph helping Johnson blow smoke up everyone's arse that he is going to pummel the EU into submission. 

Forgotton is the rules of engagement are pretty simple.

Johnson kept saying though the election campaign that a quick deal was easy as the starting point is one of already having close alignment. That is a over simplification but certainly a lot quicker.

Now Johnson has changed his mind, done a 180 and wants no alignment, fuck what I promised people.

Fine then it's pretty simple no rules from EU means a No Deal Brexit. Again that wasn't in the Tory election brochure.

The laugh is on people who voted for this guy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, IPLore said:

Nothing weird. The international language for KMA.

So Prime Ministers/National Leaders doing a "Kiss My Arse" in front of the camera is not weird?

BTW a fair proportion of KMA's involve someone getting knocked on their arse. Imagine, the press would go mental trying to outdo each other for the headline. Though "Lying cunt given an arse kicking" probably wouldn't make the cut.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, LionessRacing said:

You do validate your Chicago roots. Is Granddad still voting there? 

 

Lol

I have no “Chicago roots” you ejit  And the only thing my grandfather is doing in the afterlife is banging loose women like your mother or grandmother...

 

 

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sea warrior said:

Lol

I have no “Chicago roots” you ejit  And the only thing my grandfather is doing in the afterlife is banging loose women like your mother or grandmother...

  

 

Well, if that's who he's banging, then you didn't get much insight from a man who's tastes are that low and desperate. I'd suggest you discount his stories and try a more discerning source 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LionessRacing said:

Well, if that's who he's banging, then you didn't get much insight from a man who's tastes are that low and desperate. I'd suggest you discount his stories and try a more discerning source 

Lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, IPLore said:

However we have discussed the Treaty of the European Union (TEU) and the Treaty of Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and their predecessors (Maastricht and Lisbon) ....perhaps because we knew they had long since supplanted the Accession Treaty .

Can I suggest reading the TEU to get up to speed:

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:2bf140bf-a3f8-4ab2-b506-fd71826e6da6.0023.02/DOC_1&format=PDF

You will observe that Article 50 which you refer to is, in fact, Article 50 of the TEU.....which we have discussed in depth in the WTF thread including the judgement of the ECJ with regard to the case brought in Scotland. The judgement confirmed a nation's right to unilaterally revoke article 50, which was of significant interest at one stage in the Brexit process but is now largely irrelevant. Article 50 is not going to be revoked.

The discussion is now largely focused on the negotiations which will start in January with regard to the relations between the EU and the UK after the transition period.  The Treat of Accession, while interesting to historians, will have zero impact on those negotiations.

Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish that Kavita Puri's perspectives were completely wrong. I can't unsee the ugliness that is in the UK. Unfortunately, hate crime statistics show a link with Brexit.

image.png.b43cd45677e94c97dd359222ad1c5b33.png

Police have improved processes, though that does not explain the peaks and troughs.

The unintended consequence of raising these issues, particularly when perceived to be made in an accusatory manner, is to shut down debate.

It is my observation that accusing someone to be a bigot, is often a form of bigotry itself. It is my view that it is healthier to look at actions, and to rarely if ever conclude those actions are a sum of a person. None of us are immune to holding stereotypes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bruce Hudson said:

I wish that Kavita Puri's perspectives were completely wrong. I can't unsee the ugliness that is in the UK. Unfortunately, hate crime statistics show a link with Brexit.

image.png.b43cd45677e94c97dd359222ad1c5b33.png

Police have improved processes, though that does not explain the peaks and troughs.

The unintended consequence of raising these issues, particularly when perceived to be made in an accusatory manner, is to shut down debate.

It is my observation that accusing someone to be a bigot, is often a form of bigotry itself. It is my view that it is healthier to look at actions, and to rarely if ever conclude those actions are a sum of a person. None of us are immune to holding stereotypes.

Oh fer fuck’s sake!!!

 

Give over with that bullshite.

 

Saying “boo”  in the presence of a minority has become a “hate crime” these days. The whole meaning of “hate crime” has been diluted so much recently as to make it a joke.

 

Used to be the national pastime in the U.K. was ridiculing us Irish, we never considered it a “hate crime” we always looked upon it as a “stupidity crime” in other words, we always looked upon those who would engage in such stupidity as being, well, stupid. 

People need to harden the fuck up

 

Your graph means only one thing, that the definition of “hate crime” has become a frickingjoke, nothing else.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

No rules alignment with EU means a No Deal Brexit.

 

This radio interview with a seasoned trade negotiator is nearly a year old and nothing has changed ...the Government have learnt absolutely nothing about negotiating with the EU. Bluff and bluster and threatening No Deal is a waste of time. 

More importantly the Government haven't cottoned on that the public now know what No Deal means unlike a year ago when Brexiteers were sprouting GATT XXIV bullshit.

(listen from 2.30)

The same old.. same old from Johnson coming up.....a June 30 capitulation and sorry the dog stole my shovel. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/19/2019 at 2:29 AM, Upp3 said:

I can't watch videos with this computer, but I suppose you mean Irish referendum of Lisbon treaty? Which got knocked down by Irish voters and the main reason doing so was that they didn't understand the treaty? After that the electorate was informed and next referendum was held and it passed.

Now I'd like the election example, if possible. I have have hunch that it isn't possible.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

The same old.. same old from Johnson coming up.....a June 30 capitulation and sorry the dog stole my shovel. 

Same old same old from Jacko, how many more times can you say that on June 30 Jacko's predicting a capitulation by the Brits.

Getting to the stage of skim reading the posts now, ferk is it worth the time to view the thread any more, its like its stuck on a scratched record, can we only post something if its new please ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

^^^^That is not an example of the EU overiding a states internal vote.

Seaworm are you the BXP's media librarian canvasing for a job after Jan?

I’m an Irishman first and foremost.

I am also an Irish nationalist who believes that a United Ireland is a foregone conclusion and is only a matter of when not if.

The British are no longer viewed as a threat to our Irish way of life, the EU is. In fact, I believe that ironically, the tories, the dreaded tories might just be our salvation by hopefully bringing about the destruction of the EU or at the very least, make Ireland’s membership  untenable. 

My enemy’s enemy and all that ...   

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Sea warrior said:

Saying “boo”  in the presence of a minority has become a “hate crime” these days. The whole meaning of “hate crime” has been diluted so much recently as to make it a joke.

These, for the most part, are not the crimes the police have prosecuted. I recommend you take a deeper look or you simply come off as defending violent acts of bigotry - which I am sure is not your intention.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Bruce Hudson said:

These, for the most part, are not the crimes the police have prosecuted. I recommend you take a deeper look....

Care to. Define “for. The most part” ? And I don’t suppose there’s any correlation between “for the most part” or more importantly, those bs “hate crimes” which you alluded to in the underlined and the so called “spike” in hate crimes in the U.K.?

Any  statistician worth his or her weight in piss knows how to move an axis or tweak a control to suit their narrative and anybody who doesn’t know this shouldn’t be allowed access to statistics.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, The Dark Knight said:

so move back to Ireland you moron....

I’m surprised you were able to spell that big word correctly, congratulations!!

 

Now, I addressed this earlier, you see, unlike you liberal loons, when I make a commitment I see it through no matter what the consequences.

Thats what real men do and until my commitment is seen through to its conclusion I shall remain here.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sea warrior said:

I’m surprised you were able to speed that big word correctly, congratulations!!

 

Now, I addressed this earlier, you see, unlike you liberal loons, when I make a commitment I see it through no matter what the consequences.

Thats what real men do and until my commitment is seen through to its conclusion I shall remain here.

 

 

Must be minimum security if you have internet access..

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bruce Hudson said:

I recommend you take a deeper look or you simply come off as defending violent acts of bigotry - which I am sure is not your intention.

I want  to address this point separately because it is important and consequential to me. 

 Many years ago, during the raging troubles I was hitchhiking from Drogheda to Newry and got a ride from a lovely couple. When we got to the border (back then there was a physical hard border) I was dragged out of the car by Paras , thrown on the ground and I had the barrel of an rifle shoved in my ear. My crime? Being Irish and having a thick accent.

 On my many trips back-and-forth to Britain over the years I experienced resentment and disdain but also welcomes. One could call some of it hate but I wouldn’t classify it as such. After all, the people who were blowing up the place talked and looked like me therefore the reaction was understandable if not necessarily justified but I would in no way classify it as a hate crime. I would like to think that I was a victim not of hate but of fear and or ignorance.

Today, telling someone from a foreign country to go back to their own country, whilst not a nice thing to say shouldn’t be classified as a hate crime or any crime for that matter  and there are a multitude of other examples of stupidities that are now being classified as hate crimes instead of what they really are.

 

 

Btw. That day I was accosted at Newry, the lovely old couple who had given me the lift from Drogheda were an English couple, I will never forget how outraged they were at the Paras and how sympathetic they were to me. As a “starving student” at the time, they treated me to the first decent meal I had had in some time 

They ended up giving me a whole new perspective on the English as I’m sure I gave them about being Irish in the U.K. at that moment in history.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sea warrior said:

Many years ago, during the raging troubles I was hitchhiking from Drogheda to Newry and got a ride from a lovely couple. When we got to the border (back then there was a physical hard border) I was dragged out of the car by Paras , thrown on the ground and I had the barrel of an rifle shoved in my ear. My crime? Being Irish and having a thick accent.

Yes, that is the sort of hate based crime I am talking about. It is assault 'provoked' by an existing animosity.

3 minutes ago, Sea warrior said:

One could call some of it hate but I wouldn’t classify it as such.

In the end, it doesn't matter how you classify it. If the reason was because of a group you belonged to (or were perceived to belong to), then it would be classified by police as such, and they would lay charges accordingly.

(Personal note. Your above example is the sort of thing that triggers me. I'm sorry you had that experience. For me, its usually opposite, I get the red carpet treatment because I'm a kiwi. I often think that its likely that the same people who make positive judgments about my nationality, will be the same who make negative judgments about others.)

---

Above you questioned the statistics. Good to know that you think these specific statistics have been corrupted. Either you have researched it yourself, you are basing it on someone else's research, or have no basis to make the claim. I'd love to know which. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Dark Knight said:

my mother passed away several years ago and as I'm not religious, I don't "talk" to her.

That’s a shame, for you, for your mother I’m sure it was a relief not having to deal with you anymore...

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Bruce Hudson said:

 

In the end, it doesn't matter how you classify it.

 

It absolutely does matter how we classify it.

That is the whole point 

 

Quote

Above you questioned the statistics. Good to know that you think these specific statistics have been corrupted. Either you have researched it yourself, you are basing it on someone else's research, or have no basis to make the claim. I'd love to know which.

 

I actually have, being the father of children of colour I can categorically tell you that there isn’t a hate epidemic in in the British isles 

 

Edit: having lived in Australia, I can assure you that had you ever visited that place you’d know how the Ozzie’s treat you lot and then you could emphasize with me. :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Dark Knight said:

How did you know that my father is a milkman.

Well, let’s see, the intellectual requirements for the job of milkman are minimal and the intellectual requirements to construct posts like yours are minimal and seeing as intelligence appears to be hereditary I just put 2+2 together.

 

:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Sea warrior said:

It absolutely does matter how we classify it.

That is the whole point 

Sorry, what I meant is that it doesn't affect the compilation of statistics... in that context it doesn't matter.

40 minutes ago, Sea warrior said:

I actually have, being the father of children of colour I can categorically tell you that there isn’t a hate epidemic in in the British isles 

That's something else. Brexit is specifically about immigrants (and more) - the rise of hate is of acute interest to those who study it when it is pegged to specific events.

43 minutes ago, Sea warrior said:

Edit: having lived in Australia, I can assure you that had you ever visited that place you’d know how the Ozzie’s treat you lot and then you could emphasize with me. :-)

I have encountered racism first hand in Oz. My wife (who is dark) was served last in a Townsville bakery, after the white people. I was there, watching. She whispered to me to not say or do anything. Racial slurs are definitely alive and well in Oz, less so in the bigger cities. In the US it is far far worse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is it no longer considered okay to discuss immigration. Mention it could have a down side and you are immediately labelled a bigot, fascist racist who should be locked up. Bunch of closed off assholes shouting down anyone that disagrees I guess. Take Rocky, Brexit is about immigration, plus a few other things. Really, that's it, immigration. What a dolt he must be in real life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Gissie said:

Why is it no longer considered okay to discuss immigration. Mention it could have a down side and you are immediately labelled a bigot, fascist racist who should be locked up. Bunch of closed off assholes shouting down anyone that disagrees I guess. Take Rocky, Brexit is about immigration, plus a few other things. Really, that's it, immigration. What a dolt he must be in real life.

 Because those  championing the cause of globalization have figured out that the really stupidly educated amongst us ie. Those with liberal arts and other stupid degrees will swallow, line, hook and sinker this narrative.

And because nowadays this encompasses so much of the population that it’s a no brainer.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gissie said:

Why is it no longer considered okay to discuss immigration. Mention it could have a down side and you are immediately labelled a bigot, fascist racist who should be locked up. Bunch of closed off assholes shouting down anyone that disagrees I guess. Take Rocky, Brexit is about immigration, plus a few other things. Really, that's it, immigration. What a dolt he must be in real life.

Gissie would love that to be the case, because it would feed into his/her narrow minded assessment of what I think.

Really Gissie could spend more time expanding his/her own thoughts, rather than expending a lot of energy trying to figure out (or assuming) what others think.

Immigration is of special interest to me because it has rich pickings of misinformation, on which bigotry is founded. Note that both the for and against Brexit camps have engaged in misinformation - it is clearly not limited to immigration - and nor for that matter misinformation - both sides have genuine points.

Funny thing is that Gissie would likely like the area that I have brought my 'alleged moronic' focus onto, and that is the false accusation that everyone who is in favor of Brexit is a bigot. I've already mentioned it several times, but because Gissie's mind is closed about who I am, it is a point that Gissie may have missed - or dogmatically ignored. 

---

What Gissie did above is a near text book example of what most do: 'othering' - where views are narrowed and abilities of listening, reading and comprehending are compromised.

---

Immigration is an excellent topic to discuss, though is often difficult to break beyond the superficial as accusations of identity ('you're a bigot' and 'I am not a bigot') have a tendency to prevent the topic from being discussed in depth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My post was a general comment on how immigration is not considered a discussion subject among polite company. It used to be things like religion, but no-one cares about that anymore, but immigration, that will get the triggers and outrage flowing. Usually it comes with the negative labels I mentioned. Rocky of course needs to make it all about him, standard behaviour he has shown time and time again. Sad, but maybe this is the only life he has.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, KC375 said:

BBC's relentless pursuit of its licence-fee billions:  one in ten of all magistrate hearings,

Does this have anything to do with Brexit?

The cost of collection must be enormous, while the annual revenue is £4 billion, the actual money contributed to the arts is far less. Also, such levies impact the poor disproportionately, and thus marginally erode overall taxes to be progressive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, LionessRacing said:

Few wish to be labeled as *ist. Where *=(rac,fac,Elit) etc. 

Fortunately I am older and happy in my skin, so I don't really care if people call me names. More a reflection on them and probable shallowness.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gissie said:

My post was a general comment on how immigration is not considered a discussion subject among polite company. It used to be things like religion, but no-one cares about that anymore, but immigration, that will get the triggers and outrage flowing. Usually it comes with the negative labels I mentioned. Rocky of course needs to make it all about him, standard behaviour he has shown time and time again. Sad, but maybe this is the only life he has.

Gissie's continued referring to me as 'Rocky' is intended as a slur against me, part of the 'othering'. In the above post, I am referred to multiple times multiple times. Apparently, that is a part of me making this topic all about me?

The anti immigration stance definitely still includes religion. It is in my view a mistake to diminish religion as not being a part of the anti immigration stance. (This is part of a popular part of self misinforming many engage in.)

2 minutes ago, Gissie said:

Fortunately I am older and happy in my skin, so I don't really care if people call me names. More a reflection on them and probable shallowness.

The use of "them" in a derogatory way is classic part of 'othering'. Age has very little to do with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Waynemarlow said:

Getting to the stage of skim reading the posts now, ferk is it worth the time to view the thread any more, its like its stuck on a scratched record, can we only post something if its new please ?

Interesting bleat from someone who doesn't have one post to his name of anything new, just whining.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Yep upthread. You really should stop posting and start reading.

Jack, you are making the mistake of me seeing the previous references, and providing the connection to Brexit.

The previous references also do not answer what the connection is between Brexit and the license fees. (I do realize that the Brexit party, Farage and BJ are all against the fee, but fail to see the connection with Brexit). :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Bruce Hudson said:

Jack, you are making the mistake of me seeing the previous references, and providing the connection to Brexit....

Yes it is pretty obvious you haven't read post references about the BBC up thread. But then you say you have??

22 minutes ago, Bruce Hudson said:

...The previous references also do not answer what the connection is between Brexit and the license fees....

Which one is correct? Have you read them, yes or no? 

Then you keep digging the hole deeper. BXP and Farage??? Lost me there.

22 minutes ago, Bruce Hudson said:

....(I do realize that the Brexit party, Farage and BJ are all against the fee, but fail to see the connection with  Brexit ) .  

The connection is very obvious and upthread if you care to read it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

The connection is very obvious and upthread if you care to read it.

Apologies, I should have been more clear. It is my view that the conspiracy theory about the BBC is BS. My assumption (which I am now questioning) is that most here (Including you Jack) also thought the conspiracy theory to be BS.

In my view, the funding of the BBC would continue with or without a licence fee, and whether or not the UK is a part of the EU. The proposal to scrap the licence fee and no longer fund the BBC are separate. Only the conspiracy theory ties the two, which is why I sought a 'real' connection.

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Bruce Hudson said:

Apologies, I should have been more clear. It is my view that the conspiracy theory about the BBC is BS. My assumption (which I am now questioning) is that most here (Including you Jack) also thought the conspiracy theory to be BS.

In my view, the funding of the BBC would continue with or without a licence fee, and whether or not the UK is a part of the EU. The proposal to scrap the licence fee and no longer fund the BBC are separate. Only the conspiracy theory ties the two, which is why I sought a 'real' connection.

ok , so since you are quite invested in the debate around immigration, what is your view of immigration - let's start with your own country. Should there be more, less, from a different region? Is there an ideal population size ? In each country the answer would be quite different.

Your time starts. NOW !

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dark Cloud said:

ok , so since you are quite invested in the debate around immigration, what is your view of immigration - let's start with your own country. Should there be more, less, from a different region? Is there an ideal population size ? In each country the answer would be quite different.

Your time starts. NOW !

I'll answer you, even though you seem to have missed that my interest is about misinformation.

Personally, my tendency is for freer trade and fewer restrictions on movement.

Having said that, what interests me are the false positions put forward by different factions in attempts to prevent debate, or to firelight factions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dark Cloud said:

ok , so since you are quite invested in the debate around immigration, what is your view of immigration - let's start with your own country. Should there be more, less, from a different region? Is there an ideal population size ? In each country the answer would be quite different.

Your time starts. NOW !

 

which country, where he lives or where he migrated from?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bruce Hudson said:

I have encountered racism first hand in Oz. My wife (who is dark) was served last in a Townsville bakery, after the white people. I was there, watching. She whispered to me to not say or do anything. Racial slurs are definitely alive and well in Oz, less so in the bigger cities. In the US it is far far worse.

by any chance, did you visit the same bakery the day before and spend some time talking to that staff?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuck Sunday's are normally pretty boring here..we have Seaworm posting like a man fucking possessed egged on expertly by Hoppy (aka Dark) .."how did you know my father was a milkman" a beauty.

Then there is Bruce who thinks this thread only started yesterday for his sole enjoyment and posting pure fucking gobblygook and humping any leg going with a heartbeat. Bruce I'm afraid to say by ignoring every warning I'm now forced to refer to you as "Professor Buttinski" from now on with your officious intervention. 

Shit got to fly. Off to church to pray Boris's squeeze wakes up tomorrow with a dose of the clap and fascinated to see how Boris goes convincing her it wasn't him but Brexit will cure it along with all of the UK's ills.

Fuck I love this place..

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Fuck Sunday's are normally pretty boring here..we have Seaworm posting like a man fucking possessed egged on expertly by Hoppy (aka Dark) .."how did you know my father was a milkman" a beauty.

Then there is Bruce who thinks this thread only started yesterday for his sole enjoyment and posting pure fucking gobblygook and humping any leg going with a heartbeat. Bruce I'm afraid to say by ignoring every warning I'm now forced to refer to you as Professor Buttinski with your officious intervention. 

Shit got to fly. Off to church to pray Boris's squeeze wakes up tomorrow with a dose of the clap and fascinated to see how Boris goes convincing her it wasn't him but Brexit will cure it along with all of the UK's ills.

Its OK to admit that you don't know if there is a real connection between the licence fee and Brexit. Just the made up BS one. :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Bruce Hudson said:

Does this have anything to do with Brexit?

The cost of collection must be enormous, while the annual revenue is £4 billion, the actual money contributed to the arts is far less. Also, such levies impact the poor disproportionately, and thus marginally erode overall taxes to be progressive.

The BBC and Brexit along with bias are tied at the hip!! 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bruce Hudson said:

Apologies, I should have been more clear. It is my view that the conspiracy theory about the BBC is BS. My assumption (which I am now questioning) is that most here (Including you Jack) also thought the conspiracy theory to be BS.

In my view, the funding of the BBC would continue with or without a licence fee, and whether or not the UK is a part of the EU. The proposal to scrap the licence fee and no longer fund the BBC are separate. Only the conspiracy theory ties the two, which is why I sought a 'real' connection.

You need to look again!! 
 

So far there’s a lot of “my assumption” and “my view” going on and not much else. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, mad said:

You need to look again!! 
 

So far there’s a lot of “my assumption” and “my view” going on and not much else. 

(I did). You were one of the few that mentioned it. If there is a clear connection it is not mentioned.

BBC bias (which is very real) is not connected to licence fees, unless you count the conspiracy theory.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bruce Hudson said:

(I did). You were one of the few that mentioned it. If there is a clear connection it is not mentioned.

BBC bias (which is very real) is not connected to licence fees, unless you count the conspiracy theory.

So the BBC bias is just an oddity that occurred randomly or because the political and editorial staff decided that was a good position to take as a so called independent media source? 
 

How BBC coverage have you watched the last 2-3 years? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mad said:

So the BBC bias is just an oddity that occurred randomly or because the political and editorial staff decided that was a good position to take as a so called independent media source? 
 

How BBC coverage have you watched the last 2-3 years? 

The question is whether or not there is a direct link to the licence fees. If there is, I'm not aware of it.

Haven't watched so much in recent months, but when I was in the UK in 2017/2018 it was one of the main news feeds, frustrating because of its bias! (I often switched).

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Bruce Hudson said:

The question is whether or not there is a direct link to the licence fees. If there is, I'm not aware of it.

Haven't watched so much in recent months, but when I was in the UK in 2017/2018 it was one of the main news feeds, frustrating because of its bias! (I often switched).

So the main political editors and producers decided to do this of their own volition?? And no other reason? 
 

Remain blissfully unaware, doesn’t bother me in the slightest. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bruce Hudson said:

Its OK to admit that you don't know if there is a real connection between the licence fee and Brexit. Just the made up BS one. :) 

Ever thought I couldn't be fucked engaging with you Buttinski you lazy fuck? Someone get this fucking turnip out of here.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/20/2019 at 2:10 PM, Mambo Kings said:
On 12/20/2019 at 2:08 PM, Mambo Kings said:

Mad,

I'm disappointed in you. 

That post was unfair and uncalled for.

What have the people in Dinghy Anarchy ever done to you?  That you should send BHudson/Gantt back to them.

They have had to put up with his BS for years. Surely you can store him over here for a few months and give the rest of us some relief

 

On 12/20/2019 at 2:43 PM, mad said:

Sorry about that Mambo, as its that time of the year and all that....................we'll keep him over here until the New Year roles in, or until Jack spits him back out, whichever happens first. How does that sound?:P

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Ever thought I couldn't be fucked engaging with you Buttinski you lazy fuck? Someone get this fucking turnip out of here.

Sorry Mambo, we tried.......you can have him back now. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites