2530Ubon

3 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

 

OK I'll tell them. I can't remember anyone else on here ever suggesting that Winston Churchill was a founding father of the EU. The Council of Europe is not part of the EU and never was. The quote is a quote, it may be as erroneous as yours may be too. 

 

The Single Market did not commence until 1992 and it is far more than just the European free trade bloc I referred to, which was actually EFTA (1960).  How did you not know that?

The quote is NOT a quote. It's a fake quote. I'm a bit surprised that hard brexiteers aren't more angry that folks are putting words in the great Churchill's mouth.

The single market commenced on January 1st 1993, how did you not know that?

In the 1980s, when the economy of the EEC began to lag behind the rest of the developed world, Margaret Thatcher sent Arthur Cockfield, Baron Cockfield, to the Delors Commission to take the initiative to attempt to relaunch the common market. Cockfield wrote and published a White Paper in 1985 identifying 300 measures to be addressed in order to complete a single market. The White Paper was well received and led to the adoption of the Single European Act, a treaty which reformed the decision-making mechanisms of the EEC. In the end, it was launched on 1 January 1993.

Jeez .... how many more times are you gonna be wrong?

5 hours ago, transam said:

"Why is it Brexiteers are lazy and cavalier with facts"....

Now isn't that statement fact-less....?

 

It is not even questionable that Brexiteers are lazy and cavalier with facts - It has been proven true. The mastermind of Brexit himself - Dominic Cummings admitted that they won Brexit by feeding the public a bunch of lies such as the 350m a week to the NHS. Boris lying through his teeth that he had an oven ready deal - His deal was almost IDENTICAL to May's - he just changed the language around the backstop to avoid a hard border with Ireland. Look how that worked out when the EU brought in a hard border for a few hours over the vaccine debacle. Claiming he delivered Brexit, when it was May who triggered article 50. Gove claiming the 'union' between UK, Scotland, Wales etc would be stronger after Brexit, overspending and illegally hiding and spending more money on the campaign than allowed, racist campaigning.

The list goes on. And on. And on...

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

So where are my facts wrong?

You posted this ridiculous video "no no no" In response to my post that M. Thatcher was the 'mother' of the free trade bloc. “No, no, no!" summed up her negotiating strategy during the five-year struggle with her continental counterparts about Britain’s contributions to the European Community’s budget, a fight from which she was to emerge victorious in 1984. 

Quite frankly, I don't know why you posted a video on a completely different subject. It is common knowledge that she was the architect of the free trade bloc - as I have referenced twice now in this thread.

And for your other point - Winston Churchill is widely regarded as the father of the EU. He is even listed as one of the eleven founding fathers on the EU's website, and has a building bearing his name in the EU. Furthermore, your quoted Churchill phrase was NOT said in 1953 - it's a fake quote. It's two phrases he said almost 14 years previously that have been stitched together.

Quote

“If Britain must choose between Europe and the open sea, she must always choose the open sea.” Churchill 1953.

https://neweuropeans.net/article/604/revealing-deception-about-winston-churchill
 

Quote

 

So, it’s clear that Eurosceptics have concocted this ‘Churchill quote’ by stitching together four sentences he wrote in 1930 with a remark he shouted in 1944, and then put them together to claim he said the whole lot in a speech to Parliament on 11 May 1953.  Indeed, the quote could accurately be called a ‘stitch up’.

Still not sure?  Well, you can easily check for yourself, by reading all that Churchill said to Parliament on 11 May 1953 by a look at Hansard for that day.   It is true that in the early 1950s, Churchill did not envisage the UK being part of the sort-of “United States of Europe” that he had envisioned (although, I argue that Churchill changed his position later on in the 1950s and early 1960s, when it became clearer that the British Empire and Commonwealth were in decline).

 

So there you have it. Your facts are not facts, they are made up quotes.

9 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

He was keen on a united continental Europe, that did not include the UK.

Yes it did:

https://theconversation.com/what-churchill-really-thought-about-britains-place-in-europe-36613

As leader of the opposition in the Commons in 1950, he indicated that both the Liberals and the Conservatives were “prepared to consider, and if convinced to accept, the abrogation of national sovereignty, provided that we are satisfied with the conditions and the safeguards”. It is impossible to imagine a Tory leader saying this today.

Conservative eurosceptics may find it hard to accept, but Churchill would never have joined their ranks. Instead, his broadly pro-European stance was adopted by Conservative leaders from Macmillan to Major. Indeed, in his current quandary about how to negotiate the terms of Britain’s membership, David Cameron would do well to return to Churchill’s words for inspiration. As Churchill said in 1957:

We genuinely wish to join a European free trade area – and if our continental friends wish to reach agreement, I am quite sure a way can be found and that reasonable adjustments can be made to meet the essential interests of all.

12 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

 

Get your facts right...

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/margaret-thatcher-the-critical-architect-of-european-integration/

Thatcher’s uncompromising and often provocative rhetoric regarding European integration is probably best remembered through three famous public statements: “I want my money back!”; “We have not successfully rolled back the frontiers of the state in Britain, only to see them re-imposed at a European level”; and “No, no, no!”. The first summed up her negotiating strategy during the five-year struggle with her continental counterparts about Britain’s contributions to the European Community’s budget, a fight from which she was to emerge victorious in 1984. The second was the most trenchant sentence in her Bruges speech of 1988 about the future of the European Community. The third represented her adamant rejection in October 1990 of propositions to increase the powers of the European Parliament and the European Commission.

These bombastic statements demonstrate Thatcher’s readiness to fight to the bone for Britain’s national interest within the European Community, and they rather give the impression that she was an aggressive critic of European integration. But these must not blind us to the fact that there was much more to her European policy. The European integration process underwent a significant re-launch during the mid-1980s, after at least a decade of deadlock. By helping to bring about the Single European Act in February 1986 (the first significant change to the Treaties of Rome of 1957) she was, in fact, a central architect of European integration.

The European Council meeting at Fontainebleau in June 1984 represented a turning point, both for the European Community and for Thatcher’s European policy. The question of a rebate for Britain’s budget contribution was finally settled, and now Thatcher could turn her attention to a project close to her heart: the completion of the Single Market. Transforming the European Community into a great free trade area devoid of internal barriers went hand-in-hand with her domestic policy of liberalization and deregulation. Thatcher was never an enthusiast of a political union, let alone a federation, on the European level; rather, her priorities for the European Community mirrored her priorities at home – economic growth and tight budgetary discipline.

2 minutes ago, Poet said:

I don't know what YouTube channel you are getting your history from, but none of that is true.

Thatcher:

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-55494101

Quote

The Single Market was a creation for which the UK has paternity rights. It was Margaret Thatcher's rallying call for European reform, her calling card to unleash a wave of Japanese investment in post-industrial Britain and shepherded into existence by her appointee as commissioner Arthur Cockfield.

Churchill:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_fathers_of_the_European_Union

Quote

British prime minister during World War II, Churchill called for a "United States of Europe", organised democratically, to prevent future wars in Europe. He was a driving force behind the creation of the Council of Europe, a forerunner of the European Union

This is common knowledge (well, at least to us educated remainers)

1 minute ago, Poet said:

Of course. You never accepted the legitimacy of the democratic decision, and you have no faith that your country has the ability to survive as an independent nation. Your type has always been part of the British story. Thank God there have been others, with real heart, to carry the nation through the darkest times.

Everyone appreciates that it was a legitimate democratic decision - we're not Americans who easily believe Trumped up BS. (Well, we did believe the 350m a week to the NHS cr-p that was fed to us though)

The UK has always been a part of something larger - That's what made us successful. We had a huge empire that spanned a third of the worlds population. When that time was up, Churchill was the 'father' of the EU. We also created the single market (Thanks Margaret Thatcher) to be a part of something larger.

Now we're on our own and the UK has never been in this position. Not gonna be easy with Scotland leaving soon!

11 minutes ago, Poet said:

Doesn't change the fact that the red tape in question is EU red tape. These firms are exporting, not importing. The EU could have chosen not to punish the UK in this way, and is clearly doing so to dissuade other countries from leaving.

Actually it's the UK's fault. The UK didn't want to align itself to EU rules, so it created a load of new regulations - and a few new regulatory bodies.

Let's just name one more; (I've already mentioned vet checking for all dairy goods etc)

Instead of using the CE mark, there is a new UK mark that needs to go through a new regulatory body UKCA (UK Conformity Assessed). The UK could have chosen to allign itself and avoid all of these regulations.

15 hours ago, ukrules said:

Sounds like they have idiots doing the paperwork. Commercial invoices, who would ever have thought a business would be required to do that ????

 

Fire them and hire someone competent.

Over simplifying things doesn't make a good point - It's lazy and shows a complete disregard for the truth - and shows your brexiteer colors! There are a multitude of new regulations to go through, and a LOT of money has been added to the cost of our goods.

16 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

including producing commercial invoices, a packing list, an export accompanying document, a goods movement reference and more.

16 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

“We are now at a disadvantage to people trading within the EU,”

“We’re a very fast-paced business, but now we’re just like walking through mud. There’s just paperwork everywhere.”

Dairy produce now needs a vet to sign an EU Export Health Certificate for each shipment and there is also new paperwork and requirements for organic products. These all cost money, and time.

The freight shipping industry needs to move fast - there are perishible goods on board! When your shipments have to have a ton of paperwork ready and checks on those goods, then of course the industry is going to suffer and slow down.

1 hour ago, snoop1130 said:

 It is feasible Thailand could receive 5 million international arrivals this year or half of the original forecast as the pandemic continues to ravage the tourism industry worldwide.

Outstanding incompetence. Only last week the original 10 million claim was made. How many times are they going to throw out random numbers to the press? How many times are we going to call out this guy for BS comments?

When are the press going to start doing some journalism? Ask these fools where they are pulling these numbers from. Put it this way, last month there were just over 6000 arrivals. 10 million will be a big jump

There is a global pandemic going on which is eating away at everyones savings. Jobs and businesses have been lost. Houses have been lost. Family members have died. I'm pretty sure the last thing on most peoples minds is a holiday in Thailand. They're more focused on keeping a roof over their heads and food on the table.

2 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

1 person cannot possible sneeze with such impressive gusto to spreads virus to 1 million people who then spread to another million !!!

Is transmission possible through farts? If so, I know quite a few chaps who could easily infect a province or two with a single blast.