pitrevie

26 minutes ago, Aforek said:

As a French european guy, I like what you say, opposite to the too many TV members who don't like EU and think that solution of problems is isolation 

I can tell you that a poll last week showed  that 72% French want to stay with Euro currency

Le Pen will lose because she wants to leave Euro and EU 

Long live to EU and euro 

I agree, I am sad at the direction the UK has taken but unlike many TV posters I wish the EU well. It is certainly not in the interests of anyone least of all the UK for the EU to implode.

On 25/03/2017 at 7:36 PM, Grouse said:

Douglas Carswell just quit UKIP. I think they now have zero MPs? Hasn't that nasty Aaron Banks also left UKIP? Hilarious!

Farage the man who has failed 7 times to get into Parliament says that Carswell should now resign as an MP and fight a by-election. I agree and I hope Farage stands against him that should make it 8 times failed to get into Parliament.

4 hours ago, George FmplesdaCosteedback said:

It has changed its mind, from the last EEC referendum the UK had.

And the EU is far different from what was voted to stay in since then...

It would be amazing if the EU today wasn't vastly different from the original organisation. If it wasn't I daresay that people would have been complaining that it hadn't moved with the times. However go back and read the original intent of the founders and its quite clear what they intended the organisation to become. People who trot out that excuse as a reason to get out obviously never had that much interest but apparently every time we had some major treaty revision they demanded a referendum. The same people also have no interest in a referendum when the final Brexit deal is worked out such is the hypocrisy.

Just now, KunMatt said:

 

Not good at detecting sarcasm are you?

 

And yes, we finally begin the Brexit process on Wednesday. Despite all of rhe underhanded tactics to undermine and derail it.by the Remoaners,  Brexit is finally happening on Wednesday.

 

I'll be back on Wednesday for your epic tantrum and meltdown.  It's gonna make Brexit day even more fun.

Nice attempt to cover up your mistake as for the rest of your remarks the usual. If you had read any of my posts I accepted the result as far back as last June. I happen to think its the wrong decision but that's democracy I am entitled to that view unlike Farage who as I quoted stated he was not prepared to accept the result along with Bill Cash another Brexiter. 

As for underhand tactics do you mean our own courts and Parliament deciding things. I thought that was one of the complaints that we were being dictated to by the EU and that our own courts and Parliament should decide. Or do you think that our own unelected PM should have been allowed to use the Royal prerogative to get the ball rolling?

Just now, KunMatt said:

 

Yeah, you must be the only OAP to have voted remain.

 

Your arrogance is beyond belief.  Haha.

Sorry but you wrong on that and I know several other OAP's who voted remain. 

Just to clarify something you stated earlier, No we don't finally Brexit on Wednesday, we just fire the starting pistol you really should get better informed.

14 minutes ago, i claudius said:

Am I hell,I voted for the winning side,but if I had lost I wouldn't be grousing about it constantly, I accept what the majority want even if I don't agree, not go marching around and throwing my toys out of the pram constantly

Sent from my ASUS_T00J using Tapatalk
 

This from a leading Brexiter Bill Cash.

If David Cameron wins the European referendum he will declare it has settled Britain’s destiny.

Bill Cash says it will do nothing of the sort. Bill Cash believes that even if the Leave side lost, the struggle would continue. 

Nigel Farage said back in May 2016 that 52-48 win for the Remain side in the EU referendum would be “unfinished business”.

6 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

I wouldn't go that far, but it's certainly the root of a lot of hare-brained and damaging schemes such as Schengen.

Yeah and guess what, the vast majority of Europeans would disagree with you along with the vast number of tourists that travel throughout Europe every year. Some hare brained scheme. 

Just one example for you from people who actually live there as opposed to someone who has nothing good to say about the EU.

FRANKFURT, GERMANY — 

Many Germans enjoying the weekend open-air market in Frankfurt city center Saturday expressed support for their government’s policy of trying to keep borders open inside the Schengen zone despite security threats. Most, however, stated the need to strengthen controls on the outer borders for those entering the zone.

19 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

Yes, Abdelhamid Abaaoud is one of them.

Hasib Hussain, Mohammad Sidique Khan, Germaine Lindsay, Shehzad Tanweer were the ones who were responsible for the London bombings and they never had to cross any borders. 

 All of the hijackers who committed the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks were foreigners. All of them entered the country legally. 

One man crosses an internal border and you want to institute a siege mentality.

11 minutes ago, Naam said:

people who travel a lot within continental Europe might disagree.

I pointed that out to him several posts back but as usual a negative response. The EU is trying to make things easier for people to move around, trade etc but we have to allow the terrorists to dictate how we run our lives even though the same terrorists manage to strike at countries such as the USA and the UK which are not in the Schengen zone. Apparently the USA does not see the value of instituting Khun Han's "hard borders" even though it has suffered more casualties than anyone else from terrorists. People are able to move freely across state borders. 

1 minute ago, Khun Han said:

 

And I just noticed you've tried to compare free movement within the UK with free movement within the EU. What on earth??? Removing hard borders before the EU becomes a fully integrated federal state (as projected) is complete and utter security madness.

What are hard borders?

Yes free movement within the UK even if Scotland become independent is exactly the same as free movement within the EU is exactly the same as free movement in the USA which is a federal system Another scare attempt, its a federal system only in the sense that it consists of sovereign countries that contribute to one organisation. Nobody as far as I am aware has suggested that the EU can pass any law that doesn't first require approval of the UK sovereign parliament before it become a legal enactment in the UK. Try googling Professor Michael Dougan you might end up better informed.

Just now, Khun Han said:

 

Sandy, the fact that border security (and other security measures) sometimes fail is not even a remotely good reason to do away with security measures completely. That's insane logic. Sure, some people are able to smuggle war weapons in. But our very low gun crime statistics and the inability of islamic terrorists in the UK to obtain and use war weapons is proof that our security systems are largely working.

You are repeating the same nonsense and it doesn't matter how many times you repeat it, it is still nonsense. Nobody has done away with security measures completely or has any intention of doing so. It is as difficult to enter the Schengen zone as it is to enter the UK, they use all the same security apparatus to keep the bad guys out.

You have also ignored the fact that the UK has suffered the same terrorist atrocities has any other country in the Schengen zone. As I pointed out the UK police only recently recovered an arsenal of weapons in the hands of a UK private collector. If a private collector in the UK can obtain an arsenal of weapons in the UK then so can any other individual. They don't need to transport weapons across any border, regrettably any criminal element determined to obtain lethal weapons can do so in any country.

Its also been pointed out to you and again you have ignored it, if you think Schengen is a problem then why doesn't the USA have internal borders, after all its appears to be relatively easier in the states to obtain lethal weapons. The USA is similar to the Schengen zone in that it controls its external borders.

This is just another way of you having a go at the EU which is a constant theme of yours.

30 minutes ago, watso63 said:

Bunch of cry baby anti-democratic losers.

 

"With such a close vote, I don't see how anyone can call this the will of the people," she told Reuters. "We have so much to lose: environmentally, politically and financially.

 

As if the lunatic europhiles would have given a damn about British parliamentary and judicial sovereignty if they'd have won.??????

In a 2012 speech on the European Union (EU), Mr David Davis (now Brexit Secretary) said: “If a democracy cannot change its mind, it ceases to be a democracy”.

41 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

And as has also been pointed out many times, the removal of border controls in the Schengen zone has given free, unchecked movement to criminals and terrorists that they didn't have previously. With the advent of higher tech controls such as chipped passports and instant communication between security agencies, those border controls would be even more effective now.

 

There are reasons why the UK has relatively little gun crime, and why the few terror attacks that make it to fruition are low tech. The main ones are effective border controls and an effective security system, both of which keep war weapons largely out of public circulation.

Already debunked huge arsenal of weapons discovered in UK only in the last two years in the hands of a private dealer. If he could get them so could any terrorist. 56 dead in 2005 in London with low tech explosives. Four more dead in this past week as a result of just one crazed lunatic. Apparently the Schengen borders didn't deter any of those. 

All the technology you talk of is in place at the Schengen borders creating more borders would hardly obstruct a terrorist from moving from A to B within the Schengen area and picking up the arsenal of weapons at point B. Alternative he could of course strike within the borders where he resides rather than cross a border as they do within the UK.

41 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

I agree that determined and resourceful terrorists will always try, and sometimes succeed in their endeavours. The various security forces acknowledege this, that it's a cat and mouse game. Does that mean that we remove all hurdles and give them a free run? Schengen has helped them hugely in that respect, as shown by the terrorist operation in Paris.

Schengen didn't help that whatsoever as I have shown again debunking your claims, terrorists can obtain arms etc in any country including the UK despite border controls. No we don't remove all hurdles who is suggesting that, its not all or nothing its a compromise. We could bring air travel to a standstill if we implemented total security just like nobody is talking about removing border checks at the entry to the Schengen area. Schengen had nothing to do with the recent terrorist attack in London but it happened. Schengen had nothing to do with 9/11 but it happened. You just want to blame the EU for any and everything.

5 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

Are you implying that no border contols is as good as previous border controls which had some security breaches? If not, what's your point?

Schengen does not imply no border controls which you seem to repeat ad nauseum. As I have just shown with a story that blasts your previous ridiculous assertion sky high every country whether they are in or out of the Schengen zone has a problem with illegally obtained firearms including the UK. I have no doubt that any terrorist with enough money could obtain lethal weapons in any country in Europe.

52 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

The IRA made a huge bomb from fertiliser about 25 years ago. They would not be able to obtain such fertiliser (or any other explosive materials) in sufficient quantities to make a large bomb nowadays because of checks put in place since then.

 

Abdelhamid Abaaoud's gang were able to move an arsenal of war weapons into France without any checks. They would not be able to bring them into the UK because we didn't join the idiotic Schengen scheme. And they wouldn't be able to obtain such weapons inside the UK.

 

The recent terrorist attack in London used a hire car and two knives, so your attempt to draw a comparison is rather disingenuous. It's such intellectual dishonesty that got you on my ignore list. I gave you another chance, but you're at it again. So you're going back there.

I will just add this link for your amusement. Apparently nobody in the UK could have an arsenal of weapons in the UK because we are not in the idiotic Schengen scheme.

Just a snippet I will allow you to read the remainder and have a good laugh.

A firearms dealer found guilty of helping a seemingly respectable parish council chairman amass the biggest hoard of illegal weapons ever uncovered in the UK has been jailed for six years.

Police found 463 illegal firearms, including rifles, machine guns and an anti-tank missile, along with 200,000 rounds of ammunition in a secret room at the home of crane operator and parish council chairman James Arnold, 49, in the village of Wyverstone, Suffolk.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/pictured-britains-biggest-illegal-weapons-7400020

9 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

The IRA made a huge bomb from fertiliser about 25 years ago. They would not be able to obtain such fertiliser (or any other explosive materials) in sufficient quantities to make a large bomb nowadays because of checks put in place since then.

 

Abdelhamid Abaaoud's gang were able to move an arsenal of war weapons into France without any checks. They would not be able to bring them into the UK because we didn't join the idiotic Schengen scheme. And they wouldn't be able to obtain such weapons inside the UK.

 

The recent terrorist attack in London used a hire car and two knives, so your attempt to draw a comparison is rather disingenuous. It's such intellectual dishonesty that got you on my ignore list. I gave you another chance, but you're at it again. So you're going back there.

Yeah you have such a track record in what you term intellectual dishonesty as your attempt to smear me with that the last time backfired when I showed that the two links from LG that you were lauding turned out to to fake and which you hadn't even read. Also it isn't I that accuses people of banning them from twitter accounts that he knows nothing about or writing books about kings and queens whatever that was all about or even trying to reveal my name trying to connect me with another figment of your imagination.

However back to the subject of Brexit, only this week a major terrorist offence occurred in our capital city and we aren't even members of the Schengen area. In 2005 56 died died as a result of the London bombings, no need to cross borders it was all done from within. However such is your hatred of all things to do with the EU you attempt to smear them with everything. However I am grateful that I am on your ignore list but that will not stop me posting replies to correct the nonsense you post.

2 minutes ago, Naam said:

talking about entering the UK. a few years ago we arrived in Heathrow coming from Brazil and waiting for our connecting flight to Frankfurt. there was no time going to the lounge and i wanted to smoke a cigarette after the 12 hour flight. after some minutes scouting around trying to find a smoking area i passed through a big glass door, was outside of the terminal where taxis dropped passengers, smoked my cigarette and went inside again without being checked. 

I recall reading many years ago that the Swiss were using some European database to check passports and carried out something like 50000 checks a month and intercepted numerous suspect documents. Switzerland a hotbed of terrorism was using this database extensively. The British on the other hand seldom made use of the same database, I even wrote to my MP about it,  and its only in the last couple of visits that my passport entry and exits have been scanned.

Just now, Naam said:

Khun Han has a valid point stating

because the Schengen area enables criminals and terrorists to move big distances without any hurdles after committing a crime.

I am no terrorism expert but I think they always try to put as much distance between their base and their crime. You don't see many walking to the corner of their street and planting a bomb. The UK is not in the Schengen area and yet for some reason we have suffered numerous terrorists attacks. If there were border controls within the Schengen area all that would happen is that the terrorist would not travel so far to commit his outrage. The lunatic who ran amok in London by all accounts travelled from Birmingham. Now I would agree if the terrorists were able to enter the Schengen countries without any checks but the fact is that any person entering the Schengen area from outside goes through all the same security vetting that he would as if he were entering the UK

Just now, ballpoint said:

Firstly, as a total neutral, I believe that Britain was better off in Europe, but agree that now it is done, it should be gotten over with as soon as possible.  However, since the vote, we have seen a near continuous wave of threats from EU officials and individual countries, culminating in the proposed $62 billion exit bill just presented by the EU commission president.  They have made it very clear that Britain will be punished for daring to leave the union, and as a deterrent to others thinking of doing the same thing.  No matter how democratic any decision to leave may be.

What is clear is that the UK expected to cherry pick. The main plank of those who took us out was that the UK would remain in the single market, I have already posted links of Boris Johnson stating just that. EU leaders have told the UK that there will be no cherry picking if you want out then that is what you will get but for some reason that is regarded as a threat. We cant leave the club and then expect to receive the same benefits. As for the exit bill even if we leave we still have financial commitments pensions etc or Europol etc which we intend to continue with. So there is going to be an exit bill with both sides negotiating the outcome. I presume also you have ignored the threats from our own PM, either I get the deal that I want or I walk away. That will be a wonderful outcome for everyone.

4 minutes ago, ballpoint said:

" We have increased the number of guards, added barbed wire to the fences, taken away the vaulting horse used as cover for the tunnel.  There will be no more escapes from this union!"

So the democratic votes in Holland, France and Germany don't count then? I guess if Le Pen wins in France the vote will be ignored, or are you preparing the ground if the vote goes against you, a bit like Trump. I seem to recall also that when the UK voted Brexit that EU leaders unanimously said they accepted the vote of the British people and wished them to leave as soon as possible. Almost a year has gone by and we have yet to take the first step. 

1 hour ago, Sydebolle said:

Well, she was wrong with those "poor" refugees, 85% - 90% of them turning out to be asylum chancers rather than genuine refugees (latter to be helped as in the past). 

She might be in for another big surprise - Brexit is only the beginning of a free fall from an initially good idea among the eight founding states. 
You cannot start with an idea befitting eight more-or-less comparable countries and economies and add endlessly other states, some coming in from the cold, others clearly a generation behind and expect things to work. 

Please read what the architects of the EU project intended. They were quite clear, economic and political union so that Europe would not suffer the devastation that it twice suffered in the 20th century. It was never just about trade something that Brexiters seem eager to push which suggests they never paid much attention in the first place. However wanting to have a vote on any alteration to the aims and structure of the organisation. When it started, it was just iron, coal and steel but that was just the first step.

1 minute ago, daveAustin said:

And the sheep will all go down together! Britain is, and always will be, the only country with any stones, vision and creativity among that lot. The French and Polish are probably the only others that come close (aside from the 'stones' bit on the part of the froggies). If one can't see the disquiet in the EU, one is a little bit jaded methinks.

The disquiet in the EU, if you cannot see the disquiet in the UK or USA or name your country for that matter. We will all have to wait and see what happens now the UK has decided to go it alone and withdraw from the single biggest richest market on the planet wont we. What we do know is that when we were going at it alone we were known as the sick man of Europe. Now we are going to trade with all those countries that we could not trade with while we were members of the EU, perhaps you could give me a list of the ones you know. As for the French and Poles I think you might at least have added the Germans whose economic record since WW2 has put us all to shame given that they started from a very low point. 

Just now, Khun Han said:

 

He and his gang didn't enter the Schengen zone. They lived in it. And they were able to move themselves and their war weapons around in it unhindered. So they were able from their base in Belgium  to pick targets in France, where they weren't being monitored, and move freely to there from their base  to commit their atrocities. Something they wouldn't have been able to do if they'd chosen a target in the UK, because we opted out of the idiotic Schengen scheme. But, hey, Schengen's great for tourists. I don't dispute that.

So they lived in the Schengen area. Now explain how that is different to another terrorist living in the UK such as we saw in recent days being able to move around the UK freely. Or perhaps some terrorist based in London going to Scotland or Wales and carrying out a terrorist attack there. In 1996 the IRA took a vehicle from London and exploded it in the centre of Manchester, could easily have been Glasgow or Edinburgh. 

1 minute ago, Naam said:

a valid point that can't be disputed.

Perhaps you could answer the questions I posed then. If he could enter the Schengen zone through some port of entry for example Berlin and fool the immigration officers with his papers then how is that different to entering say the UK through Heathrow with the same papers and the same result and travelling the length and breadth of the UK. Presumably all the weapons he obtained for his mischief were obtained within the Schengen zone not carried it with his luggage in much the same way the UK bombers could obtain all their material within the UK and any criminal element could obtain a gun within the UK and travel the length and breadth of the UK.