Lies Told To Norway

[rodp]

You think? Why should they decide that at the same time you mention the colour of peoples' skin?

I only mentioned White English, you mentioned discriminating against dark skinned folk, I never brought them into the conversation. I used the term White English because (A) they're still the majority in this country and (B) also in my daughters class. Do you have a problem with that ?

Again, why the inferiority complex? And are you going to answer the question regarding believing your eyes (without the drivel), name one thing that's more factual than what you see?

[Granett]

Rodp - I'm not going to debate with you anymore unless someone else arguing to Leave says they stand by your posts.

[ShootingEgg]

I stopped talking as its friday night and the pub after work seemed better than reading your posts. Nice to know you've resulted to calling people who support being the UK as its own are dumb.. Anyway im going to leave you to it as my pints getting warm... Hate a warm pint me...

[rodp]

Rodp - I'm not going to debate with you anymore unless someone else arguing to Leave says they stand by your posts.

So, you're not going to answer the questions I asked then, or in fact questions others have answered. Best just run away and hide then, mommy's apron is always a good place. I did have some more I wanted to ask, rather more revealing, but obviously you have something to hide so we'll leave it at that and let you go run away

I stopped talking as its friday night and the pub after work seemed better than reading your posts. Nice to know you've resulted to calling people who support being the UK as its own are dumb.. Anyway im going to leave you to it as my pints getting warm... Hate a warm pint me...

Not at all, there was method in my madness. In fact he's far from dumb, he didn't react at all to it.

[12gauge82]

 

You're just wrong. You can vote out your MEP and you can vote out your head of state. Can Oxfordshire claim the UK isn't democratic because the county can't vote out members of the cabinet?

 

 

 

Well it is really - it would be pretty telling if you cannot point at a law and say "this has been imposed on me against my will and as a direct result of EU membership".

 

 

But those laws would have been decided on by a parliament in which you are directly represented, and there aren't any you object to.

 

 

Is this just the same point made earlier?

 

It's not a misunderstanding on my part - your beliefs about the EU commission are just plain wrong. Your premise is based on false assumptions. Your argument is fundamentally flawed.

 

 

What? People fought and died for your misunderstanding of what the EU is and how it works?

 

As Winston Churchill said:

 

"I look forward to a United States of Europe, in which the barriers between the nations will be greatly minimised and unrestricted travel will be possible."

 

and then later:-

 

"We must build a kind of United States of Europe.. The structure of the United States of Europe, if well and truly built, will be such as to make the material strength of a single state less important.. If at first all the States of Europe are not willing or able to join the Union, we must nevertheless proceed to assemble and combine those who will and those who can."

How about your just wrong, why is it that the UK government can't lower immigration from within the EU then? Did you elect Mr junker or any of the others? You elect an mep who has virtually no say on anything, these are freedoms mine and others relatives spilled blood for and is totally undemocratic

[12gauge82]

And I don't remember Winston Churchill saying anything about giving away our sovereign powers or allowing our supreme court be overruled by a European one with laws made by unelected people

[Granett]

How about your just wrong, why is it that the UK government can't lower immigration from within the EU then? Did you elect Mr junker or any of the others? You elect an mep who has virtually no say on anything, these are freedoms mine and others relatives spilled blood for and is totally undemocratic

How is freedom of movement proof of a lack of democracy?

 

I didn't directly elect Junker. Did you directly elect the head of our civil service?

 

Our MEPS have just as much say as any other.

 

What freedoms are you talking about? You haven't mentioned any.

 

In what of the limited circumstances where the EU supreme court can intervene have you perceived anyone in the UK to have been unfairly done down?

Edited June 17, 2016 by Granett

[12gauge82]

Yes, my own eyes. The school my daughter teaches at has just had to employ a translator, at the schools cost. The local hospital where a lot of my family work is swamped with immigrants coming in with existing ailments and complaints that should be dealt with at the doctors or chemists. Both of these are now affecting white English .......... you know ............ the folk who's country this actually is, the one's born and bred here. In one case W/E children are losing some benefits due to the budget being spent and also falling behind due to waiting for the translator to explain to non English speaking. In the case of the hospital waiting times are up and beds are not available.

How more credible than seeing it do you need?

 

Now, if you have private education and health care for your family this obviously will not be of any concern to you, if you don't how do you justify doing this to your family?

You beet me to it with this, I and alot of UK people don't need stats, they only need to walk through certain areas, walk into a school, hospital, prison, job centre etc,ect,ect to see the impact its had on the country, I'm all for immigration but it should be who we as the UK people decide, not who were told to take by unelected figures in other countries.

[12gauge82]

How is freedom of movement proof of a lack of democracy?

Because it wasn't implemented by an elected government and I can't chose another government because they to are powerless to change anything if we're a member of the EU, see how this democracy thing works?

 

I didn't directly elect Junker. Did you directly elect the head of our civil service?

No but the government the UK people elected did, and if the majority of UK people were unhappy with it and the party in power wouldn't change it they could be voted out, see democracy again?

 

Our MEPS have just as much say as any other.

Which is very little at all, once a law is made your mep can't even ask it be changed or implement a new law, look into it if you don't believe me.

What freedoms are you talking about? You haven't mentioned any.

The freedom to kick a government out if they're not doing what they were elected to do, this is not possible with the eu

In what of the limited circumstances where the EU supreme court can intervene have you perceived anyone in the UK to have been unfairly done down?

How about not being able to kick know terrorists out of the country, the human rights laws that protect evil people from facing justice and which allows them to sue the state at the tax payers expense

[Granett]

Yeah, we don't need due process to determine anything, not when you and Rodp "don't need stats", you just know. Like knowing all about "white English .......... you know ............ the folk who's country this actually is, the one's born and bred here".

 

Has nobody from the Vote Leave got anything critical to say about Rodp's comments?

[Granett]

How about not being able to kick know terrorists out of the country, the human rights laws that protect evil people from facing justice and which allows them to sue the state at the tax payers expense

So it's the concept of universal and inalienable human rights that are such an afront to your national pride? Do you think Churchill would agree with you on that? The passing of the Human Rights Act is one of the noblest points in our country's history. It fundamentally and indisputably sets us on higher moral ground than half the world. To be part of a nation at such an advanced point in its maturity as to be able to allow everyone those rights speaks to a wealth, economically, morally, and culturally that is the envy of the world.

Edited June 17, 2016 by Granett

[Danger-Mouse]

How is freedom of movement proof of a lack of democracy?

 

Well, because we can`t vote against it and our own government can`t enact any laws to change it. Take your pick, it`s either a lack of democracy or a lack of sovereignty. Both are good enough reasons for me to want to leave.

 

I didn't directly elect Junker. Did you directly elect the head of our civil service?

 

Again, proving the lack of demos. No but as was pointed out the last time someone tried to use this example, the head of the civil service, whilst undoubtedly being somewhat influential in policy cannot himself dictate it or pass it.

 

Our MEPS have just as much say as any other.

 

Well actually they don`t. Addressed by JRM a few days ago. Proportionally, places like Malta actually have a higher number of MEPs than we do.

 

 

So, that`s answers to most of your questions. Something I`ve done in most of my discussions with you. However the same cannot be said of you. Most of the time you are unwilling or unable to answer questions and often reply with a question of your own rather than framing a direct response. Failing that you ignore them completely.

 

Nice bit of Churchill btw. I particularly like the closing elements of that speech.

 

"I must now sum up the propositions which are before you.

Our constant aim must be to build and fortify the strength of the United Nations Organisation.

Under and within that world concept, we must re-create the European family in a regional structure called, it may be, the United States of Europe.

The first step is to form a Council of Europe.

If at first all the States of Europe are not willing or able to join the Union, we must nevertheless proceed to assemble and combine those who will and those who can.

The salvation of the common people of every race and of every land from war or servitude must be established on solid foundations and must be guarded by the readiness of all men and women to die rather than submit to tyranny.

In all this urgent work, France and Germany must take the lead together.

Great Britain, the British Commonwealth of Nations, mighty America, and I trust Soviet Russia - for then indeed all would be well - must be the friends and sponsors of the new Europe and must champion its right to live and shine."

 

You see nowhere does Churchill actually suggest we should be a part of it. Indeed his closing line makes that very clear.

 

Oh I love this bit too . . .

 

Yet all the while there is a remedy which, if it were generally and spontaneously adopted, would as if by a miracle transform the whole scene, and would in a few years make all Europe, or the greater part of it, as free and as happy as Switzerland is today.

 

irony or what?

[secretagentmole]

So it's the concept of universal and inalienable human rights that are such an afront to your national pride? Do you think Churchill would agree with you on that? The passing of the Human Rights Act is one of the noblest points in our country's history. It fundamentally and indisputably sets us on higher moral ground than half the world. To be part of a nation at such an advanced point in its maturity as to be able to allow everyone those rights speaks to a wealth, economically, morally, and culturally that is the envy of the world.

It may be, however when it means we cannot deport scum who murder and rape the citizens of this country to the part of world they came from, because they might be imprisoned for something they did back there, because the country they fled from is judged to be unsafe (ie it has a dictator or extreme government they managed to annoy before leaving, coming to this country and committing crimes here), then there is nothing to be proud about, only sad that our safety can be put at risk because of fools and bleeding heart liberals!

[12gauge82]

Yeah, we don't need due process to determine anything, not when you and Rodp "don't need stats", you just know. Like knowing all about "white English .......... you know ............ the folk who's country this actually is, the one's born and bred here".

 

Has nobody from the Vote Leave got anything critical to say about Rodp's comments?

And now your putting words in my mouth. I think you need to research some facts, I'm not saying everything will be better if we leave just that I've weighed it up and in my opinion leave is a no brainier, you've disagreed with facts and said I'm wrong which shows you have made assumptions based on wrong information, but like I said on an earlier post, for me personally none of it matters, to me the eu undemocratic and my family did not die defending my freedoms for me to willingly hand it away. Implying that I'm racist or an xenophobic just shows that you've lost your argument and some of my closest friends would laugh at you for implying it, you couldn't be more wrong

[rodp]

And now your putting words in my mouth. I think you need to research some facts, I'm not saying everything will be better if we leave just that I've weighed it up and in my opinion leave is a no brainier, you've disagreed with facts and said I'm wrong which shows you have made assumptions based on wrong information, but like I said on an earlier post, for me personally none of it matters, to me the eu undemocratic and my family did not die defending my freedoms for me to willingly hand it away. Implying that I'm racist or an xenophobic just shows that you've lost your argument and some of my closest friends would laugh at you for implying it, you couldn't be more wrong

As most on here are.

 

Mr Granett has a hidden agenda, or at least something he doesn't want to reveal.

 

Granett, answer this one last question, are you and you nearest and dearest what would be called white English ?

[Granett]

How is freedom of movement proof of a lack of democracy? -

 

1) Well, because we can`t vote against it and our own government can`t enact any laws to change it. Take your pick, it`s either a lack of democracy or a lack of sovereignty. Both are good enough reasons for me to want to leave.

 

I didn't directly elect Junker. Did you directly elect the head of our civil service?

 

2) Again, proving the lack of demos. No but as was pointed out the last time someone tried to use this example, the head of the civil service, whilst undoubtedly being somewhat influential in policy cannot himself dictate it or pass it.

 

Our MEPS have just as much say as any other.

 

3) Well actually they don`t. Addressed by JRM a few days ago. Proportionally, places like Malta actually have a higher number of MEPs than we do.

1 - But you can't vote against specific parts of the Queen's Speech, rather, just vote for one party or the other. Your complaint seems to be against the degree to which your elected representatives make decisions on your behalf. Rescaling this from Europe-wide, to UK-wide does nothing to resolve that complaint.

 

2 - Neither does the head of the commission. The Council or Parliament ultimate vote.

 

3 - Each MEP holds equal voting powers I believe.

 

So, that`s answers to most of your questions. Something I`ve done in most of my discussions with you. However the same cannot be said of you. Most of the time you are unwilling or unable to answer questions and often reply with a question of your own rather than framing a direct response. Failing that you ignore them completely.

I didn't expect such disingenuous stuff from you DM. What questions have I failed to answer? If I've answered with a question, my answer should be apparent - usually my question highlighting the fallacy in the question that's been put to me - you're intelligent enough to know that.

 

Nice bit of Churchill btw. I particularly like the closing elements of that speech.

 

"I must now sum up the propositions which are before you.

Our constant aim must be to build and fortify the strength of the United Nations Organisation.

Under and within that world concept, we must re-create the European family in a regional structure called, it may be, the United States of Europe.

The first step is to form a Council of Europe.

If at first all the States of Europe are not willing or able to join the Union, we must nevertheless proceed to assemble and combine those who will and those who can.

The salvation of the common people of every race and of every land from war or servitude must be established on solid foundations and must be guarded by the readiness of all men and women to die rather than submit to tyranny.

In all this urgent work, France and Germany must take the lead together.

Great Britain, the British Commonwealth of Nations, mighty America, and I trust Soviet Russia - for then indeed all would be well - must be the friends and sponsors of the new Europe and must champion its right to live and shine."

So your interpretation was that Churchill wanted it, just not for Britain - you would rather interpret Churchill as a hypocrite, instead of pro-EU? Are those voting to leave "championing its right to live and shine"?

 

You see nowhere does Churchill actually suggest we should be a part of it. Indeed his closing line makes that very clear.

Right, so when he said:

 

"The whole movement of the world is towards an interdependence of nations. We feel all around us the belief that it is our best hope, if independent, individual sovereignty is sacrosanct and inviolable, how is it that we are wedded to a world organisation?... How is it that we have undertaken this immense obligation for the defence of Western Europe...? It can only be justified and even tolerated because on either side of the Atlantic it is felt that interdependence is part of our faith and the means of our salvation."

 

What exactly did he mean?

 

Oh I love this bit too . . .

 

Yet all the while there is a remedy which, if it were generally and spontaneously adopted, would as if by a miracle transform the whole scene, and would in a few years make all Europe, or the greater part of it, as free and as happy as Switzerland is today.

 

irony or what?

No not irony. When people consider what was his answer they just need to read the next few lines:-

 

"What is this sovereign remedy? It is to re-create the European Family"

[ShootingEgg]

A little off your topic chaps but relevant. I work in a company that has workers from ALL over the world.. One spanish girl was in london before moving to bristol for work. And she said that there were more foriegn speaking people than english speaking in London and she was shocked.. To me that speaks volumes...

 

Grannet I await your reply

[Granett]

And now your putting words in my mouth... Implying that I'm racist or an xenophobic just shows that you've lost your argument and some of my closest friends would laugh at you for implying it, you couldn't be more wrong

To avoid "putting words in your mouth, I'll just use direct quotes (bold my own):-

 

Yes, my own eyes. The school my daughter teaches at has just had to employ a translator, at the schools cost. The local hospital where a lot of my family work is swamped with immigrants coming in with existing ailments and complaints that should be dealt with at the doctors or chemists. Both of these are now affecting white English .......... you know ............ the folk who's country this actually is, the one's born and bred here. In one case W/E children are losing some benefits due to the budget being spent and also falling behind due to waiting for the translator to explain to non English speaking. In the case of the hospital waiting times are up and beds are not available.

How more credible than seeing it do you need?

 

Now, if you have private education and health care for your family this obviously will not be of any concern to you, if you don't how do you justify doing this to your family?

You beet me to it with this, I and alot of UK people don't need stats, they only need to walk through certain areas, walk into a school, hospital, prison, job centre etc,ect,ect to see the impact its had on the country, I'm all for immigration but it should be who we as the UK people decide, not who were told to take by unelected figures in other countries.

 

It's that racist statement from Rodp and your statement "You beat me to it" seemingly agreeing with him that makes you look like a racist to me. Edited June 17, 2016 by Granett

[rodp]

Ooh, it now appears it's racist to say white English children are born and bred here, that it's their country. So, although nothing to imply it's not the home country of any other colour it's still racist to some (one)

 

Granett, you really have a serious problem with your head, I hope to God you don't have fac or sgc.

 

By the way, did you see my last question, or just ignoring it like you do with others from various members?

[12gauge82]

So it's the concept of universal and inalienable human rights that are such an afront to your national pride? Do you think Churchill would agree with you on that? The passing of the Human Rights Act is one of the noblest points in our country's history. It fundamentally and indisputably sets us on higher moral ground than half the world. To be part of a nation at such an advanced point in its maturity as to be able to allow everyone those rights speaks to a wealth, economically, morally, and culturally that is the envy of the world.

It depends how you interpret them, we already had one of the fairest systems in the world I'm proud to say this country has been one of the first to push fairness for all but some of the human rights act has been abused by monsters to protect them from justice and has been instrumental in allowing them to continue to harm innocent people, again something my ancestors didn't lay there lives down for, we don't need the eu to tell us how to treat people fairly, the UK has been one of the front runners in that area all by its self and it's legal system the envy of the world since magna carter

[Granett]

A little off your topic chaps but relevant. I work in a company that has workers from ALL over the world.. One spanish girl was in london before moving to bristol for work. And she said that there were more foriegn speaking people than english speaking in London and she was shocked.. To me that speaks volumes...

 

Grannet I await your reply

That's another Anecdotal Fallacy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies?wprov=sfla1

 

If I find and tell you about someone who told me how insular, small minded and lacking in diversity they found everywhere outside London, then we reach stalemate.

 

In normal debating a logical fallacy defeats itself, but this forum doesn't seem to recognise the usual rules of debate. WHo knows about your colleague? Were they listening to tourists? Do they come from rural Spain and unused to a cosmopolitan city like London? Who knows. Usually it wouldn't be my job to speculate.

[12gauge82]

To avoid "putting words in your mouth, I'll just use direct quotes (bold my own):-

It's that racist statement from Rodp and your statement "You beat me to it" seemingly agreeing with him that makes you look like a racist to me.

Well you've totally jumped to conclusions again without getting facts, what I mean by that is walk into your local hospital its at breaking point due to number of people, there's not enough places in schools for children etc I don't need stats to see that I can see it with my own eyes. without sounding corny I have many friends from many backgrounds hence why my friends would laugh at you and if you look back you will see in an earlier post I've stated I am for immigration, just that it should benefit the country and its people and of course protect those in need

[ShootingEgg]

That's another Anecdotal Fallacy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies?wprov=sfla1

 

If I find and tell you about someone who told me how insular, small minded and lacking in diversity they found everywhere outside London, then we reach stalemate.

 

In normal debating a logical fallacy defeats itself, but this forum doesn't seem to recognise the usual rules of debate. WHo knows about your colleague? Were they listening to tourists? Do they come from rural Spain and unused to a cosmopolitan city like London? Who knows. Usually it wouldn't be my job to speculate.

Tourists dont tend to use rush hour tubes for 7 months of the year. And im sorry but there are parts of every city that do not have english speaking cultures.. Bristol for one has a large somali community and strangly enough they arent spread out. They all live in one suburb...

 

Queue the " well they arent European " response....

 

*note* I was giving what is commonly known as an example.

[Danger-Mouse]

1 - But you can't vote against specific parts of the Queen's Speech, rather, just vote for one party or the other. Your complaint seems to be against the degree to which your elected representatives make decisions on your behalf. Rescaling this from Europe-wide, to UK-wide does nothing to resolve that complaint.

 

No my complaint is as already stated a combined lack of democracy and sovereignty. Let`s consider the current Conservative manifesto. They vowed to bring immigration figures down. But they can`t actually make any significant inroads into doing that. True they could cut down on non EU immigration, but they can`t do anything about anyone from Europe coming here. So our democratically elected party is powerless to act on a promise they made. Why? Because of our membership of the EU. Because EU laws are considered greater than our own. I don`t care whether the topic is immigration or the straightness of cucumbers. I want our democratically elected government to be able to pass laws and repeal laws without interference from a body I did not elect to speak for me.

 

2 - Neither does the head of the commission. The Council or Parliament ultimate vote.

 

3 - Each MEP holds equal voting powers I believe.

 

Proportionally that is not the case. I`ll let Jacob explain. Start around 3:30, or watch the lot, it`s very good.

 

 

 

I didn't expect such disingenuous stuff from you DM. What questions have I failed to answer? If I've answered with a question, my answer should be apparent - usually my question highlighting the fallacy in the question that's been put to me - you're intelligent enough to know that.

 

I`m also intelligent enough to realise that deflection is a useful tactic when you have no answer. That aside you did fail to answer a very direct and simple question from me. I had thought it was in this thread but it appears it must be in a different one regarding the EU.

 

 

 

So your interpretation was that Churchill wanted it, just not for Britain - you would rather interpret Churchill as a hypocrite, instead of pro-EU? Are those voting to leave "championing its right to live and shine"?

 

Absolutely. It`s pretty clear throughout that speech. He talks about France and Germany leading the way, the only time he mentions Great Britain is at the end, "Great Britain . . . must be the friends and sponsors of the new Europe and must champion its right to live and shine." Do you not think that he would have suggested that Britain would lead alongside France and Germany if we were to be involved in this European state? This our greatest PM of all time, the man who would not be cowed by Hitler, arguably one of the greatest and most patriotic Britons of all time. "must be the friends and sponsors of the new Europe" That`s all he said of us. I`m certainly not interpreting him as a hypocrite, only you have mentioned that word.

 

And yes, perhaps in some ways we are. Without us they can push towards futher integration without our interference.

 

Right, so when he said:

 

"The whole movement of the world is towards an interdependence of nations. We feel all around us the belief that it is our best hope, if independent, individual sovereignty is sacrosanct and inviolable, how is it that we are wedded to a world organisation?... How is it that we have undertaken this immense obligation for the defence of Western Europe...? It can only be justified and even tolerated because on either side of the Atlantic it is felt that interdependence is part of our faith and the means of our salvation."

 

What exactly did he mean?

 

I don`t know. Give me the entire speech and I`d have a better idea. After all it`s easy to pick a snippet and play it for your cause. You started with Churchill, I found an alternative that I could swing my way and now you`ve sent the ball back over the net. We could go on all night but as Churchill isn`t around to comment then neither of us can categorically prove which way he would vote today. However I do believe

 

"He would want, as far as he possibly could to protect the sovereignty of the House of Commons, the democracy that he defended and that he served all his life"

 

(Boris Johnson - The Churchill Factor)

 

 

No not irony. When people consider what was his answer they just need to read the next few lines:-

 

"What is this sovereign remedy? It is to re-create the European Family"

 

The irony is that Switzerland is indeed a rich and happy nation who have just torn up their application to join the EU.

[Granett]

Your post structure makes it a nightmare to reply to!

 

EDIT: Actually, scratch that- the forum formatting is more awkward.

Edited June 17, 2016 by Granett