The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (345 Viewers)

shmmeee · Mar 3, 2019

SkyblueBazza said:
Why the hell raise it as an issue then?

There have been programmes uncovering chickens living in what I suspect are similar conditions in the UK. Fact is - if the chlorination isn't an issue for you, you shot down ypur own argument because I would hazard a bet that animal welfare is far more considered generally in the US compared to many countries in the EU

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

No it’s not. There were 500 deaths from salmonella in the US last year compared to 0 here. Because their health and safety regs are poor all through the supply chain. Because America is ideologically obsessed with no regulation and to hell with the consequences. Much like the far right Brexiteers like Farage and Rees-Mogg.

They are dodgy businessmen who can’t make a profit without a system stacked in their favour and this whole project is designed to maximise their profits at the expense of the average citizen.

And people are cheering them on!

Madness.

A generation raised on Daily Mail fake news who genuinely think they’re oppressed because the state won’t let them die from salmonella poisoning.

Utter madness.

Sick Boy · Mar 3, 2019

Astute said:
Would you like to explain why we couldn't talk about a trade deal or are you needlessly defending the EU as usual.

As I said, if you can’t comprehend why with the talk of deregulation and the Irish border, then I don’t know what to say really. And you call the people in charge incompetent.

skybluetony176 · Mar 3, 2019

Astute said:
Point one shows you don't have a clue what is going on.

Point two. Did you vote UKIP and then proudly tell everyone?

Point 3. Did you constantly go on about going on a March with a mate of Tommy and constantly get told how much of an idiot you are for even considering it?

Point 4. Show me where these 'likes' are. I don't fish for 'likes'. I say it how it is. That is how I normally get everything right on this subject. I might not like what is happening but I don't let myself get blinded by the truth that I don't like. And constantly lying like you do won't change anything.

Just like Mart still goes on about my moronic (being polite here) castigating of Selmayr, Juncker and how they break rules, regulations and the law to get their own way. Yet the two investigations agreed fully with me. They are frauds. They shouldn't be holding the power of 28 nations and half a billion people. As you know the leaders of the countries in the EU want to take the power back. But those running the EU have made it so they can't. Do you call this good?

Point one. Have you actually heard of article 50.

Point two. I’ve voted UKIP once in the Euros, green twice in the euros, Labour twice in the general elections, Lib Dem once, Tory the other times and Tory exclusively in council elections. You’re not labelling me a green, Labour or Tory voter even though that’s where the majority of my votes have gone. Surprising given I’m clearly more of a green voter than a UKIP voter. For someone who claims to be a neutral you’re displaying an incredible amount of biased to the singular minority of my voting history. How very un-neutral. Maybe you say it ironically in the same way you call yourself astute and then demonstrate nothing to show that you are.

Point three. I say point but you’ve cast an aspersion not made a point. You’re insinuating that a march about CCFC has an anterior motive. That’s incredible disingenuous of you. On your same moronic logic I guess you must be boycotting CCFC, given that the same person attends CCFC games and therefore you clearly stand side by side with them. As I say, given your own moronic logic.

Point four. Whether you fish for likes or not is irrelevant. The racist like what you have to say. It’s as simple as that. You’ve clearly found your audience. Ironically you try to go out of your way to insinuate that I’m a racist while lapping up applause from actual racist. Shame you’re not astute enough to recognise that.

Grendel · Mar 3, 2019

shmmeee said:
No it’s not. There were 500 deaths from salmonella in the US last year compared to 0 here. Because their health and safety regs are poor all through the supply chain. Because America is ideologically obsessed with no regulation and to hell with the consequences. Much like the far right Brexiteers like Farage and Rees-Mogg.

They are dodgy businessmen who can’t make a profit without a system stacked in their favour and this whole project is designed to maximise their profits at the expense of the average citizen.

And people are cheering them on!

Madness.

A generation raised on Daily Mail fake news who genuinely think they’re oppressed because the state won’t let them die from salmonella poisoning.

Utter madness.

There has been a significant rise in salmonella in the uk In the last year

This is right up there with your “food inflation is 20% in a year” embarrassment which I assume you read in the Guardian

Astute · Mar 3, 2019

Sick Boy said:
As I said, if you can’t comprehend why with the talk of deregulation and the Irish border, then I don’t know what to say really. And you call the people in charge incompetent.

So you can't explain a reason that doesn't exist. Thank you.

Astute · Mar 3, 2019

skybluetony176 said:
Point one. Have you actually heard of article 50.

Point two. I’ve voted UKIP once in the Euros, green twice in the euros, Labour twice in the general elections, Lib Dem once, Tory the other times and Tory exclusively in council elections. You’re not labelling me a green, Labour or Tory voter even though that’s where the majority of my votes have gone. Surprising given I’m clearly more of a green voter than a UKIP voter. For someone who claims to be a neutral you’re displaying an incredible amount of biased to the singular minority of my voting history. How very un-neutral. Maybe you say it ironically in the same way you call yourself astute and then demonstrate nothing to show that you are.

Point three. I say point but you’ve cast an aspersion not made a point. You’re insinuating that a march about CCFC has an anterior motive. That’s incredible disingenuous of you. On your same moronic logic I guess you must be boycotting CCFC, given that the same person attends CCFC games and therefore you clearly stand side by side with them. As I say, given your own moronic logic.

Point four. Whether you fish for likes or not is irrelevant. The racist like what you have to say. It’s as simple as that. You’ve clearly found your audience. Ironically you try to go out of your way to insinuate that I’m a racist while lapping up applause from actual racist. Shame you’re not astute enough to recognise that.

So everyone was wrong on the thread for pointing out how much of an idiot you are? Of course.

There is nothing at all from negotiating a trade deal that can be signed after we have left......If we ever do. I have noticed the more knowledgeable ones on here are not backing you up at all but as usual choose not to point out where you are wrong as they want the same as you however we get it.

Are you stating as a fact that you have never made racist comments on here? Would you be happy to disappear from here if I prove you wrong yet again as we don't need closet racists on here.

skybluetony176 · Mar 3, 2019

Astute said:
So everyone was wrong on the thread for pointing out how much of an idiot you are? Of course.

There is nothing at all from negotiating a trade deal that can be signed after we have left......If we ever do. I have noticed the more knowledgeable ones on here are not backing you up at all but as usual choose not to point out where you are wrong as they want the same as you however we get it.

Are you stating as a fact that you have never made racist comments on here? Would you be happy to disappear from here if I prove you wrong yet again as we don't need closet racists on here.

So how is calling a white Irish man a performing monkey and then later on monkey boy in reference to the previous comment racist exactly? Come on. You’re astute, apparently. Explain it? Am I still allowed to call my children cheeky monkeys. Am I allowed to listen to Ian Brown and the specials? Oh shit, I’ve just realised that I have some gorilla glue in the garage. Clearly I’m a racist. Then again, I don’t like your posts so clearly I’m not.

Sick Boy · Mar 3, 2019

Astute said:
So you can't explain a reason that doesn't exist. Thank you.

It’s not my fault you can’t comprehend why.

Sick Boy · Mar 3, 2019

skybluetony176 said:
So how is calling a white Irish man a performing monkey and then later on monkey boy in reference to the previous comment racist exactly? Come on. You’re astute, apparently. Explain it? Am I still allowed to call my children cheeky monkeys. Am I allowed to listen to Ian Brown and the specials? Oh shit, I’ve just realised that I have some gorilla glue in the garage. Clearly I’m a racist. Then again, I don’t like your posts so clearly I’m not.

I’ve already said several times on this thread I was massively on the wind up on here most of the time then, yet he still carries on with it.

Deleted member 5849 · Mar 3, 2019

Sick Boy said:
I’ve already said several times on this thread I was massively on the wind up on here most of the time then

'Was'?

'Then'?

skybluetony176 · Mar 3, 2019

Sick Boy said:
I’ve already said several times on this thread I was massively on the wind up on here most of the time then, yet he still carries on with it.

We all know he struggles with comprehension and context. I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve explained to him what was said, why and in what context. He likes to use it as a distraction when he can’t argue a point. More fool him.

martcov · Mar 3, 2019

Astute said:
That is the same as when someone says our standards will lower when we leave the EU. They ignore that we already have standards better than most EU countries.

Why can't we keep this to the truth?

We won't even be leaving altogether so will have to keep up with EU standards as a minimum but I suppose point scoring is more important than anything else.

The whole point of lobby groups funded by US billionaires is to convince us that letting the agriindustry into our 65 million market is a good idea. That’s why Davis, Prescott and co were invited to a couple of weeks in the US including a visit to the US agriculture ministry.

If we allow standards not acceptable to the EU into the UK, there won’t be regulatory alignment. Which is why the ERG want us as free from EU regulations as possible. They want to import from everywhere including emerging markets. Lower standards. More competitive. Some who have investments in the US or emergening markets stands to cash in. Our farmers won’t be able to compete. As Minford already predicted.

martcov · Mar 3, 2019

Astute said:
What is a part of the withdrawal agreement?

FOM is an EU rule. But they are happy to leave everyone in limbo that had moved to another country until they get what they want. In the meantime we have inept people of the UK trying to work out things with inept people from the EU.

They want us to keep existing rights. It is simple. The offer from the UK lessened rights. By doing away with FOM life is more difficult for Brits in the EU. For one thing you can have permanent residency in one EU country, but if you move to another you have to start as a new migrant. But you don’t give a toss.

martcov · Mar 3, 2019

Astute said:
So everyone was wrong on the thread for pointing out how much of an idiot you are? Of course.

There is nothing at all from negotiating a trade deal that can be signed after we have left......If we ever do. I have noticed the more knowledgeable ones on here are not backing you up at all but as usual choose not to point out where you are wrong as they want the same as you however we get it.

Are you stating as a fact that you have never made racist comments on here? Would you be happy to disappear from here if I prove you wrong yet again as we don't need closet racists on here.

Several people have mentioned your comprehension problems on here.

martcov · Mar 3, 2019

Astute said:
And where have I said differently about the Tories?

EU played it better? Only one of them has been of any use. The rest of them have just wanted to cause more trouble. If you call obnoxious twats being obnoxious then you are correct. This could have been a lot easier. But they are more concerned in continuing to get money off us than anything else. Nobody other than them want them to hold all the power. But they always seem to get praise on here.

No they are not more concerned about money which we have agreed that we owe and which we will pay.

They are less concerned about the damage caused by Brexit than Europe splitting in nationalist nation states.

martcov · Mar 3, 2019

Astute said:
Try again.

We wanted to talk about rights. But only how much we owed the EU for leaving and what would happen with Ireland were the only subjects allowed.

Blatant lie as usual.

martcov · Mar 3, 2019

Astute said:
That is the same as when someone says our standards will lower when we leave the EU. They ignore that we already have standards better than most EU countries.

Why can't we keep this to the truth?

We won't even be leaving altogether so will have to keep up with EU standards as a minimum but I suppose point scoring is more important than anything else.

No deal would be the end of regulatory alignment.

martcov · Mar 3, 2019

Captain Dart said:
They don't want all that pension spending to evaporate, self interest.

Why aren’t we thinking of our self interest by keeping FOM? Allowing us to employ young hard working EU migrants. Funny isn’t it. Allowing people in to spend money is ok when Spain does it, but when the UK allows working people in it’s a bad thing.

martcov · Mar 3, 2019

Astute said:
Depends what sort of criminal record would deny them status. It is checking their UK record. I wouldn't be against someone with serious crimes since they came to the UK being refused. Just like I would have no sympathy for anyone from the UK committing serious crimes elsewhere in the EU being refused permission to stay there.

The point was you could have an unpaid parking fine, or be a hardened criminal under the proposal and be refused entrance. No differentiation.

martcov · Mar 3, 2019

SkyblueBazza said:
So you doubt the British Govt have had zero contact or discussion with foreign authorities about protecting Brits living abroad? You doubt the Spanish had willing ears too given the spending power of saiid Brits?
Do you doubt it because it is announced by the Spanish? Or because the British Govt hasn't contacted you personally to explain that, just like some of us have repeatedly told you since even before any Brexit negotiations even started, lots happens behind the scenes.

I am surprised, given your instant suspicion that any negative news like Honda & Nissan & JL is a direct result of Brexit, that you aren't shouting JL latest announcement from the rooftops as the same!

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Has the JLR „announcement“ actually happened?

martcov · Mar 3, 2019

Astute said:
Yes the Tories have made a mess of it from the start. And this includes offering a referendum if they got in again to get their votes back from UKIP.

Negotiations? They haven't even started yet. The EU said what must happen before the negotiations start and we can't even get that far.

Those in charge of the EU are not trying to get what is best for the other members. That would be a trade deal. And the EU doesn't even want to talk about one yet. They are willing to let us leave without a deal more than talk trade. And all because they need us to stay in and help pay for their projects.

And I don't blame those who voted leave. Remain lied. Leave lied. Remain did project fear. Leave did project fear. Nobody got told the truth. Millions voted for the lies they believed the most and what they feared the most. If they had been told the truth then I would agree more.

Leave lied and cheated far more than remain. To equivalate the two is twisting things.

The police investigations are still ongoing, but had it not been only an advisory referendum, it would have been voided two years ago.

There will be a trade deal as soon as we can agree the basic relationship. Dead easy. We have agreed the money, we have agreed the withdrawal agreement in principle and if we allow EU citizens the same rights as under FOM then we can proceed to a trade deal. Only problems are ERG and DUP. Fanatics holding the country to ransom.

martcov · Mar 3, 2019

Astute said:
Yes the Tories have made a mess of it from the start. And this includes offering a referendum if they got in again to get their votes back from UKIP.

Negotiations? They haven't even started yet. The EU said what must happen before the negotiations start and we can't even get that far.

Those in charge of the EU are not trying to get what is best for the other members. That would be a trade deal. And the EU doesn't even want to talk about one yet. They are willing to let us leave without a deal more than talk trade. And all because they need us to stay in and help pay for their projects.

And I don't blame those who voted leave. Remain lied. Leave lied. Remain did project fear. Leave did project fear. Nobody got told the truth. Millions voted for the lies they believed the most and what they feared the most. If they had been told the truth then I would agree more.

And, BTW, neither Juncker nor Selmayr rule the EU or 500 million people.

martcov · Mar 3, 2019

Grendel said:
The “hard data” regarding intelligence is in itself a lazy assumption. A 22 year old with a third at Northampton in David Beckham studies would be defined as a better educated than a CEO of a major business who hasn’t studied Becks.

In how many cases is that true?

martcov · Mar 3, 2019

Astute said:
Point one shows you don't have a clue what is going on.

Point two. Did you vote UKIP and then proudly tell everyone?

Point 3. Did you constantly go on about going on a March with a mate of Tommy and constantly get told how much of an idiot you are for even considering it?

Point 4. Show me where these 'likes' are. I don't fish for 'likes'. I say it how it is. That is how I normally get everything right on this subject. I might not like what is happening but I don't let myself get blinded by the truth that I don't like. And constantly lying like you do won't change anything.

Just like Mart still goes on about my moronic (being polite here) castigating of Selmayr, Juncker and how they break rules, regulations and the law to get their own way. Yet the two investigations agreed fully with me. They are frauds. They shouldn't be holding the power of 28 nations and half a billion people. As you know the leaders of the countries in the EU want to take the power back. But those running the EU have made it so they can't. Do you call this good?

Well they don’t. Juncker can’t legislate and Selmayr is head of the civil service.

Neither rule 500 million people.

The two reports didn’t agree with you. They don’t even know your views.

You jumped the gun by making false claims about the first report.

The second report said that they had contrived an emergency. ( a bit like Trump). A bit different to your premature claims. You never mentioned „contriving a case of urgency“.

SkyblueBazza · Mar 3, 2019

shmmeee said:
No it’s not. There were 500 deaths from salmonella in the US last year compared to 0 here. Because their health and safety regs are poor all through the supply chain. Because America is ideologically obsessed with no regulation and to hell with the consequences. Much like the far right Brexiteers like Farage and Rees-Mogg.

They are dodgy businessmen who can’t make a profit without a system stacked in their favour and this whole project is designed to maximise their profits at the expense of the average citizen.

And people are cheering them on!

Madness.

A generation raised on Daily Mail fake news who genuinely think they’re oppressed because the state won’t let them die from salmonella poisoning.

Utter madness.

I certainly can't argue with that. Though our current system does much to accommodate such cads anyway imo

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Astute · Mar 4, 2019

skybluetony176 said:
So how is calling a white Irish man a performing monkey and then later on monkey boy in reference to the previous comment racist exactly? Come on. You’re astute, apparently. Explain it? Am I still allowed to call my children cheeky monkeys. Am I allowed to listen to Ian Brown and the specials? Oh shit, I’ve just realised that I have some gorilla glue in the garage. Clearly I’m a racist. Then again, I don’t like your posts so clearly I’m not.

So everyone who pulled you up on racist comments were wrong because you try to find excuses for them? Someone who is supposed to be as pro EU as yourself would normally vote UKIP whatever your excuses are?

Mart pulled you up on it. Others who agree with your latest twisted logic on this thread had a go at you. Sick Boy wasn't happy with you at all. But now your bullshit is on a subject they agree with everything is suddenly OK.

Astute · Mar 4, 2019

Sick Boy said:
It’s not my fault you can’t comprehend why.

I have explained why you are wrong. There has been several times I have proven you wrong where you just come out with comments like this or even insults to try and make yourself look right. But yet again it is obvious.

Point out what is wrong.

We are allowed to have talks on trade deals with anyone but we are not allowed to sign anything until we have left.

We are not allowed to have talks with any EU country on trade as they have agreements as a trading union. And we can't have talks on a trade agreement with the EU as they refuse to.

Astute · Mar 4, 2019

martcov said:
They want us to keep existing rights. It is simple. The offer from the UK lessened rights. By doing away with FOM life is more difficult for Brits in the EU. For one thing you can have permanent residency in one EU country, but if you move to another you have to start as a new migrant. But you don’t give a toss.

I don't give a toss?

More like I detest lies and liars.

For once a truthful post from you other than the last few words. And it is actually an admission that I am right. The EU wants to keep everything as it is. If they offered us a trade agreement it would be one major reason for not remaining.

So now you have admitted that I am right how about explaining why I have a comprehensive problem on the matter.

Astute · Mar 4, 2019

martcov said:
The point was you could have an unpaid parking fine, or be a hardened criminal under the proposal and be refused entrance. No differentiation.

As I said it would depend on what they counted as what would count against someone getting residency. Parking tickets is your normal piss take. But why should a hardened criminal be allowed to stay in any country? This isn't just the UK.

Astute · Mar 4, 2019

martcov said:
Leave lied and cheated far more than remain. To equivalate the two is twisting things.

The police investigations are still ongoing, but had it not been only an advisory referendum, it would have been voided two years ago.

There will be a trade deal as soon as we can agree the basic relationship. Dead easy. We have agreed the money, we have agreed the withdrawal agreement in principle and if we allow EU citizens the same rights as under FOM then we can proceed to a trade deal. Only problems are ERG and DUP. Fanatics holding the country to ransom.

So what you are saying is that if we keep everything else the same the EU will allow us a trade deal.

Why bother leaving?

Astute · Mar 4, 2019

martcov said:
And, BTW, neither Juncker nor Selmayr rule the EU or 500 million people.

Who does then?

Selmayr and Juncker broke the rules, regulations and law. Nothing can be done about it. Yet they are not in charge......

Astute · Mar 4, 2019

martcov said:
Well they don’t. Juncker can’t legislate and Selmayr is head of the civil service.

Neither rule 500 million people.

The two reports didn’t agree with you. They don’t even know your views.

You jumped the gun by making false claims about the first report.

The second report said that they had contrived an emergency. ( a bit like Trump). A bit different to your premature claims. You never mentioned „contriving a case of urgency“.

Erm hello. I mentioned it months before the first report was released. You told me I was wrong. After the first investigation you went with what the EU commission said and not what the report from it said. After the second report was released you still tried to go with what the EU commission had said previously. When you finally admitted that the second investigation was right you said it would be best if Selmayr went so people could see there is transparency in the EU. Then when I pointed out that happened last year you started going on about employment law as a reason why Selmayr should keep his position. You even ignored the MEP's who only had 12 out of about 550 say he should keep his job.

So no transparency either.

And no the EU commission watchdog didn't know what I had said. But what they said was exactly the same as what I had said. Yet strangely enough you disagreed with every word.

martcov · Mar 4, 2019

Astute said:
Erm hello. I mentioned it months before the first report was released. You told me I was wrong. After the first investigation you went with what the EU commission said and not what the report from it said. After the second report was released you still tried to go with what the EU commission had said previously. When you finally admitted that the second investigation was right you said it would be best if Selmayr went so people could see there is transparency in the EU. Then when I pointed out that happened last year you started going on about employment law as a reason why Selmayr should keep his position. You even ignored the MEP's who only had 12 out of about 550 say he should keep his job.

So no transparency either.

And no the EU commission watchdog didn't know what I had said. But what they said was exactly the same as what I had said. Yet strangely enough you disagreed with every word.

Here we go again. You said the law had been broken. That is not what the first report said. I quoted it. You answered by quoting another part about rules.

The second report was clear that the law had been broken. Which I accepted as, presumably, the ombudswoman knows more than either of us.

I didn’t rely on the original EC report, which was before the first report, but quoted their version. I also quoted their objections to the ombudsman’s first report and the rules that they said they kept to. To hear both sides.

That is what neutral people do. You just jump in regardless to pretend that the UK is doing the right thing as the appointment of the head of civil service breached the law. You ignore the fact that May appointed her loyal lieutenant for the same reasons as Juncker and 2 others appointed Selmayr. To get through Brexit with their man at the helm.

They did not say exactly the same as you said. They explained their decision and why they overruled the objections to the first report. You didn’t mention that at all. You had made your decision anyway as it passed into your argument.

You have since claimed that Selmayr rules 500000 thousand people in 28 countries. Your comprehension is terrible.

That is transparent. I read the whole thing on the EU website. How about May‘s head of civil service loyal lieutenant? A bit of moaning from Corbyn and then never heard of again.

What happens to Selmayr will depend upon how binding the final report was. He is an employee and has a contract of employment. Let’s see.

martcov · Mar 4, 2019

Astute said:
Who does then?

Selmayr and Juncker broke the rules, regulations and law. Nothing can be done about it. Yet they are not in charge......

They are not in charge whether they broke the rules or not. They cannot legislate. They are executive.

The people in charge of the direction of the EU are the EU Council and to some extent the parliament.

The people you claim are not in charge.

Your comprehension is terrible.

martcov · Mar 4, 2019

Astute said:
So what you are saying is that if we keep everything else the same the EU will allow us a trade deal.

Why bother leaving?

Exactly my point. The whole thing is a scam by vested interests. People who own hedge funds with ROW portfolios, people who benefit from tax havens, and the demagogues who are cashing in on the rage created by disinformation in the papers owned by billionaire non residents and by expert use of social media by companies part owned or part led by neo fascists like Bannon.

Where are the tangible upsides?

The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (345 Viewers)

As of right now, how are thinking of voting? In or out

Remain

Leave

Undecided

Not registered or not intention to vote

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Super Moderator

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency