UK voters should make final Brexit decision if talks with EU collapse: poll

[aright]

1 minute ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

All they show is the personal opinion of the respective person. It’s like making an accusation, then quoting your buddy saying the same and calling that evidence. 

 

My question still hasn’t been answered: Whereas the Leave campaign clearly lied to its people, where is the evidence proving that the EU lied to European citizens? After all, this is how the discussion started; Macron calling out the Brexiteers doe lying, someone else claiming the EU did that as well. 

 

 

How about the EU's Maastricht Treaty which says member states are not allowed to bail out other member states. So how did Greece get over its problems then? The treaty itself lies to the public but we understand the EU, rules are rules until they become inconvenient then you lie.  

[tebee]

53 minutes ago, aright said:

 

...

 

You refer to working together to help weaker members, where is the evidence? On two of my recent posts I asked these two questions, I am still waiting for answers :-

 

"It will be good to get away from a Union which seems to have no answer to record unemployment, bank bailing out, extreme right wing political parties and dealing with millions of third world migrants. If any Remainers can point me to a link showing the Commissions plans to deal with these problems I would be grateful."

 

"I would ask the commission  why a border in some far flung province of the EU where only 0.1% of all EU trade crosses borders was of such theological economic and political importance?" 

 

 

 

I personally see austerity as the root of all evil.

 

But let me answer  the second question - it's the principal of the thing . The Irish government are very concerned about the future of the Good Friday agreement of which they and the UK are signatures. Any Non-CU +Sm solutions for Brexit will produce a hard border which will breach that agreement. Not have a border in that situation would be illegal (WTO) and breach the single market, which relies on border controls to maintain its integrity. In support of the Irish government and maintaining the principles of the SM  they are prepared to take a stand against the UK even if it causes significant economic hardship.

 

Now I realize that the Conservatives my not understand integrity as it is such a foreign concept to them, but surely you do?   

[melvinmelvin]

9 minutes ago, aright said:

 

if not that,

but you may have a 2nd go at a Brexit referendum, depends on what Labour conf comes up with.

[welovesundaysatspace]

9 minutes ago, aright said:

How about the EU's Maastricht Treaty which says member states are not allowed to bail out other member states. 

Article 122 of the Maastricht treaty states: when a member-state 'is in difficulties or is seriously threatened with severe difficulties caused by natural disasters or exceptional occurrences beyond its control, the Council [of national governments], on a proposal from the Commission, may grant, under certain conditions, Union financial assistance to the member-state concerned.

[melvinmelvin]

11 minutes ago, aright said:

How about the EU's Maastricht Treaty which says member states are not allowed to bail out other member states. So how did Greece get over its problems then? The treaty itself lies to the public but we understand the EU, rules are rules until they become inconvenient then you lie.  

 

easy aright,

that is how treaties and int law works - pretty soft stuff they are,

the writing is there to guide and assist you, if you want to do things differently - you bend it

 

happens every damned day of the year in some city or other

 

[aright]

4 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

easy aright,

that is how treaties and int law works - pretty soft stuff they are,

the writing is there to guide and assist you, if you want to do things differently - you bend it

 

happens every damned day of the year in some city or other

 

I agree, the only addition I would make is the UK did not contribute one penny to the Greek bail out. Is that principle or common sense....not sure.

[nauseus]

29 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

All they show is the personal opinion of the respective person. It’s like making an accusation, then quoting your buddy saying the same and calling that evidence. 

 

My question still hasn’t been answered: Whereas the Leave campaign clearly lied to its people, where is the evidence proving that the EU lied to European citizens? After all, this is how the discussion started; Macron calling out the Brexiteers doe lying, someone else claiming the EU did that as well. 

 

 

Some of these "persons" have been rather influential w.r.t the EU. None of them are my buddies but I do admire a few of them. You asked My Thai Life for evidence of lies and I have added some more.

 

Now you change your question. The referendum campaign suffered lies from both sides; the leavers on TV forums freely acknowledge this but most remainers do not, particularly yourself.

[melvinmelvin]

7 minutes ago, aright said:

I agree, the only addition I would make is the UK did not contribute one penny to the Greek bail out. Is that principle or common sense....not sure.

 

7 minutes ago, aright said:

I agree, the only addition I would make is the UK did not contribute one penny to the Greek bail out. Is that principle or common sense....not sure.

 

I'd say both,

 

or as some Swedes say, kinda a bit more than 50% of each

(drygt helften av varje)

 

[welovesundaysatspace]

4 minutes ago, nauseus said:

You asked My Thai Life for evidence of lies and I have added some more.

 

Now you change your question.

I didn’t change the question. My Thai Life responded to Macron calling the Leave campaign liars that the EU has been constantly lying to European citizens. I am still waiting for him to produce any evidence. 

 

[aright]

32 minutes ago, tebee said:

I personally see austerity as the root of all evil.

 

But let me answer  the second question - it's the principal of the thing . The Irish government are very concerned about the future of the Good Friday agreement of which they and the UK are signatures. Any Non-CU +Sm solutions for Brexit will produce a hard border which will breach that agreement. Not have a border in that situation would be illegal (WTO) and breach the single market, which relies on border controls to maintain its integrity. In support of the Irish government and maintaining the principles of the SM  they are prepared to take a stand against the UK even if it causes significant economic hardship.

 

Now I realize that the Conservatives my not understand integrity as it is such a foreign concept to them, but surely you do?   

It’s the principle of the thing? We are not talking living room cosy here we are talking politics. When you mix politics with economics you get a solution which adapts principles to circumstances. To believe anything else is naive.

If I could give you my answer to my question

 "I would ask the commission  why a border in some far flung province of the EU where only 0.1% of all EU trade crosses borders was of such theological economic and political importance?" 

As a result of Salsburg I believe the answer lies in the EU's feeling for us Brits, with contempt and spite. I should add nothing to do with the European people only the Commission

Any chance of an answer to the first question or any other Remainers come to think of it?

 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, My Thai Life said:

Have you heard of the expression being "economical with the truth"? Is that lying - I say "yes", I guess you say "no".  I think the simple definition that you propose is not sufficient.

 

Politicians as we all know are adept at lying, it's a necessary skill for that "profession". But deliberate witholding of critical information over a period of 70 years in accordance with a gameplan laid down by Monnet can hardly be said to be honest. I would say that deliberate witholding of information over 70 years according to a long-term gameplan, as clearly evidenced in my quotes, is deceit of the highest order.

 

If you want to use semantics to support your state of denial that's your choice.

 

While the "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" may be too high an ideal for politicians, it does give a different perspective on "lying" than the one that you adhere to.

 

It's truly unbelievable that the people who wanted to keep the UK in the EU knew so little about the EU's 70 year campaign of deception, and seem to care even less.

Firstly I agree with you that politicians should be far more transparent than they often are. Then let's asset the fact that UK and perhaps USA politicians are probably the worst in the western world. When I first started to get interested of world politics, I was amazed how UK politicians acted towards their country. Selfish and childish group of people. Not leaders of a country. At least they should not be. 

 

I often wish Europe should have a 30-years grand plans in place, it's just a wish. Europe is able to create perhaps 5-10 years plans at it's best. Our member countrie work in 2-4 year timespans. China has it's 30-years plans, which works in the long run.

 

There really is not 70-years plan for the Europe. It would be impossible in today's hectic western world, where we don't pause enough to think about the future. 

 

If someone wrote an article 70 years ago, it doesn't mean that it's considered as a plan to follow today. It was just one person's ideas how the future should be.

 

 I could write an article, where I say my ideas of getting rid of all but 1-3 languages, getting rid of timezones, changing the distance measurements based on light seconds etc. That still wouldn't be a plan for the future. 

 

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

Economical with the truth or just good old deception. Here's a few more quotes, some showing this deception but others showing the political and economic reality of the EU. Clarke's starter is honest, at least:

 

“I look forward to the day when the Westminster Parliament is just a council chamber in Europe.”
(Kenneth Clarke, Conservative Chancellor in International Currency Review Vol 23 No 4 1996)

 

“The EU is the old Soviet Union dressed in Western clothes”
(President Gorbachev)

 

When you are so clearly copying material someone else has written, why don't you provide a link to the copied material and credit the author?

 

[My Thai Life]

1 minute ago, oilinki said:

If someone wrote an article 70 years ago, it doesn't mean that it's considered as a plan to follow today. It was just one person's ideas how the future should be.

In practice Monnet's vision (European superstate) and method (stealth and deceit and irreversibility) became the gameplan, masterplan, playbook that has been used for 70 years by EU leaders (and he wasn't working alone to begin with of course); it has been used as a deliberate policy of ever-increasing and irreversible integration through deceit. There is overwhelming evidence for this. Anyone who is interested in the EU owes themselves to do some research in this area.

 

It's shocking that so many people are unaware of this.

 

Brexit is the first case of reversing the "irreversible", and this is the major reason of the many reasons that EU leaders are so terrified of Brexit. It cannot be seen to succeed, or others might want to follow suit.

 

If it's so hard for the UK to re-establish national sovereignty, imagine how difficult it would be for a small European nation inside Schengen and the Euro.

 

I am not anti-European in the slightest. I would be very surprised if anyone on this forum has worked more extensively across Europe than myself. I am a national of 2 European countries. I have studied several European languages. I cannot support the EU in its current state - and it will never reform willingly.

[Chomper Higgot]

This’ll put a cat among the pigeons:

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-45616308

 

 

As I have been saying since the spring, this year’s Party Conferences are going to be very interesting.

 

At least half the nation is not being represented by this government or by Brexit.

 

Let the real game’s begin.

 

 

 

[mommysboy]

3 hours ago, tebee said:

 

 

The people with the strongest opinions about the EU have turned out to be the people who knew the least about it. Remarkably, they knew even less about the Good Friday Agreement.

 

Understand this & it all makes sense of sorts... 

But still they spout their nonsense

Brexiters have proved to be remarkably dense.  Most of us have learned as we've gone on.  I think it's because they scored a goal early doors, and can't do anything other than park the bus.  

 

Just to clarify: I don't care in or out, but I don't want the sxxxshow we have for sure.

[Chomper Higgot]

6 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

In practice Monnet's vision (European superstate) and method (stealth and deceit and irreversibility) became the gameplan, masterplan, playbook that has been used for 70 years by EU leaders (and he wasn't working alone to begin with of course); it has been used as a deliberate policy of ever-increasing and irreversible integration through deceit. There is overwhelming evidence for this. Anyone who is interested in the EU owes themselves to do some research in this area.

 

It's shocking that so many people are unaware of this.

 

Brexit is the first case of reversing the "irreversible", and this is the major reason of the many reasons that EU leaders are so terrified of Brexit. It cannot be seen to succeed, or others might want to follow suit.

 

If it's so hard for the UK to re-establish national sovereignty, imagine how difficult it would be for a small European nation inside Schengen and the Euro.

 

I am not anti-European in the slightest. I would be very surprised if anyone on this forum has worked more extensively across Europe than myself. I am a national of 2 European countries. I have studied several European languages. I cannot support the EU in its current state - and it will never reform willingly.

Page 1 of the Treaty of Rome (from memory the very first paragraph).

 

No deceit at all, written in black and white (and translated into the language of every nation that signed the treaty).

 

Away with you and your claims of ‘stealth and deceit’.

 

And away with you and your oft repeated claim to be neither a Leave nor a Remain supporter- the evidence of your own posts demonstrates that claim to be a fabrication distinct from the truth.

Edited September 23, 2018 by Chomper Higgot

[mommysboy]

1 hour ago, aright said:

It’s the principle of the thing? We are not talking living room cosy here we are talking politics. When you mix politics with economics you get a solution which adapts principles to circumstances. To believe anything else is naive.

If I could give you my answer to my question

 "I would ask the commission  why a border in some far flung province of the EU where only 0.1% of all EU trade crosses borders was of such theological economic and political importance?" 

As a result of Salsburg I believe the answer lies in the EU's feeling for us Brits, with contempt and spite. I should add nothing to do with the European people only the Commission

Any chance of an answer to the first question or any other Remainers come to think of it?

 

Political economy is what you are grappling for!

[melvinmelvin]

10 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

This’ll put a cat among the pigeons:

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-45616308

 

 

As I have been saying since the spring, this year’s Party Conferences are going to be very interesting.

 

At least half the nation is not being represented by this government or by Brexit.

 

Let the real game’s begin.

 

 

 

 

I have read similar views in 2-3 newspapers

 

if that holds true,

and the conf and the Unions go for a 2nd ref.?

 

wow,

if Labour and the Unions put their campaign machinery behind that

it would not be easy to avoid a 2nd ref.

 

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

In practice Monnet's vision (European superstate) and method (stealth and deceit and irreversibility) became the gameplan, masterplan, playbook that has been used for 70 years by EU leaders (and he wasn't working alone to begin with of course); it has been used as a deliberate policy of ever-increasing and irreversible integration through deceit. There is overwhelming evidence for this. Anyone who is interested in the EU owes themselves to do some research in this area.

 

It's shocking that so many people are unaware of this.

 

Brexit is the first case of reversing the "irreversible", and this is the major reason of the many reasons that EU leaders are so terrified of Brexit. It cannot be seen to succeed, or others might want to follow suit.

 

If it's so hard for the UK to re-establish national sovereignty, imagine how difficult it would be for a small European nation inside Schengen and the Euro.

 

I am not anti-European in the slightest. I would be very surprised if anyone on this forum has worked more extensively across Europe than myself. I am a national of 2 European countries. I have studied several European languages. I cannot support the EU in its current state - and it will never reform willingly.

I am very much in support of EU superstate as you call it. It gives me more possibilities for the future and takes nothing away from me. 

 

Some folks eagerness to be against EU feels like USA's war against socialism. It's more to do with the word, than the actual meaning of the word. 

 

Why shouldn't I support EU becoming a real country?

 

 

Edited September 23, 2018 by Guest

[welovesundaysatspace]

30 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

In practice Monnet's vision (European superstate) and method (stealth and deceit and irreversibility) became the gameplan, masterplan, playbook that has been used for 70 years by EU leaders (and he wasn't working alone to begin with of course);

Utter nonsense; a conspiracy theory missing any evidence. Speaks volumes that you’re failing to provide facts for your claims the fourth time in a row now. 

 

Quote

it has been used as a deliberate policy of ever-increasing and irreversible integration through deceit.

Again, you are writing nonsense:

- “irreversible”: Article 50 let’s every member state exit the EU, as we can see with the U.K.  

- “through deceit”: It was each member state’s own sovereign decision to join the EU, and the terms of membership were clear to everyone. 

 

Quote

There is overwhelming evidence for this. Anyone who is interested in the EU owes themselves to do some research in this area.

Why should anyone do your homework? When you spread accusations, it’s your responsibility to prove it. 

 

Quote

It's shocking that so many people are unaware of this.

It’s shocking how much nonsense you write. 

 

Quote

If it's so hard for the UK to re-establish national sovereignty

The U.K. doesn’t have to re-establish sovereignty. It is and always has been a sovereign state. 

 

Your problem is that you’re confusing sovereignty with a world without any obligations. It’s like signing an employment contract and then crying someone took your sovereignty because you have to go work 40 hours a week and comply some work policies. And then you cry it’s irreversible because you have a notice period and would have to find a new job, and you actually like it in that city.

 

No one forces anyone to join the EU, and no one stops anyone from leaving. And the way the EU has developed and will develop in the future was and will be a decision of it’s member states. If member states don’t like further integration, they are free to vote against it or leave the EU. 

 

Edited September 23, 2018 by welovesundaysatspace

[Basil B]

1 hour ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

I have read similar views in 2-3 newspapers

 

if that holds true,

and the conf and the Unions go for a 2nd ref.?

 

wow,

if Labour and the Unions put their campaign machinery behind that

it would not be easy to avoid a 2nd ref.

 

Labour now talking of a second referendum to remain.

 

If Labour were to call for a second referendum it could really pull the rug from under May... 

 

Q.  Who will back May and the Tories?

• SNP 
• Lib Dems 
• Sinn Fien 
• Plaid Cymru 
• The Green Party

A.  None of the above, the only party that would support May is the DUP and they will not in the likelihood of boarder controls which seem inevitable, may even see some Tories voting in defiance of the whip  ...or just coincidentally having urgent business elsewhere.

Edited September 23, 2018 by Basil B

[Basil B]

 Duplicated

Edited September 23, 2018 by Basil B
Error quoted instead of edit

[Chomper Higgot]

12 minutes ago, Basil B said:

Labour now talking of a second referendum to remain.

 

If Labour were to call for a second referendum it could really pull the rug from under May... 

 

Q.  Who will back May and the Tories?

• SNP 
• Lib Dems 
• Sinn Fien 
• Plaid Cymru 
• The Green Party

A.  None of the above, the only party that would support May is the DUP and they will not in the likelihood of boarder controls which seem inevitable, may even see some Tories voting in defiance of the whip  ...or just coincidentally having urgent business elsewhere.

More than anything else, Labour adopting a referendum on the deal (which the Unions will only back if it also includes ditching Brexit) will expose public support for a second referendum. 

 

The Government has already accepted that the Brexit Deal shall be voted on by Parliament, this could very easily become a no confidence vote and trigger a general election.

 

Then the question is, what do the public really want?

[Basil B]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

More than anything else, Labour adopting a referendum on the deal (which the Unions will only back if it also includes ditching Brexit) will expose public support for a second referendum. 

 

The Government has already accepted that the Brexit Deal shall be voted on by Parliament, this could very easily become a no confidence vote and trigger a general election.

 

Then the question is, what do the public really want?

I feel their has been too much bad blood for us to suddenly say we want to stay, we would be 3rd class members, remaining in the EU would just be like Euro Vision, all ganging up on us Brits...

 

Never voted for Leave,  and although I predicted exiting would be like a bad divorce I never expected it to be this bad, all for very little benefit.

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, oilinki said:

When you are so clearly copying material someone else has written, why don't you provide a link to the copied material and credit the author?

 

As they are quotes from speech then they are not authored - the speakers names are given - that's enough.  

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

Utter nonsense; a conspiracy theory missing any evidence. Speaks volumes that you’re failing to provide facts for your claims the fourth time in a row now. 

 

Again, you are writing nonsense:

- “irreversible”: Article 50 let’s every member state exit the EU, as we can see with the U.K.  

- “through deceit”: It was each member state’s own sovereign decision to join the EU, and the terms of membership were clear to everyone. 

 

Why should anyone do your homework? When you spread accusations, it’s your responsibility to prove it. 

 

It’s shocking how much nonsense you write. 

 

The U.K. doesn’t have to re-establish sovereignty. It is and always has been a sovereign state. 

 

Your problem is that you’re confusing sovereignty with a world without any obligations. It’s like signing an employment contract and then crying someone took your sovereignty because you have to go work 40 hours a week and comply some work policies. And then you cry it’s irreversible because you have a notice period and would have to find a new job, and you actually like it in that city.

 

No one forces anyone to join the EU, and no one stops anyone from leaving. And the way the EU has developed and will develop in the future was and will be a decision of it’s member states. If member states don’t like further integration, they are free to vote against it or leave the EU. 

 

Yes, we've already seen how free member states are to vote against new treaties. It is even more difficult to actually leave with any kind of dignity, as we see now. The EU is still expecting another vote before March in hope that Brexit will be voided completely. Typical bullying pressure and I hope that even more Britons can see this for what it is now.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Basil B said:

I feel their has been too much bad blood for us to suddenly say we want to stay, we would be 3rd class members, remaining in the EU would just be like Euro Vision, all ganging up on us Brits...

 

Never voted for Leave,  and although I predicted exiting would be like a bad divorce I never expected it to be this bad, all for very little benefit.

Nigel Farage behaved for years like a mad Russian dog in EU parliament creating separation between UK and EU. 

 

I'm sure EU understands that Farage and his Russian paying pals are just a fraction what UK really represents.

 

If UK would really be an essential part of the EU, I'm sure there would be a solution available, even this late of the negotiations. But that would require UK to do some ballsy moves, like putting Farage in his cage. 

 

Btw Was there any conclusion what Farage and Assange discussed when Farage visited him in the Ecuador's embassy?

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, nauseus said:

As they are quotes from speech then they are not authored - the speakers names are given - that's enough.  

So where did you copy those texts?

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, oilinki said:

When you are so clearly copying material someone else has written, why don't you provide a link to the copied material and credit the author?

 

All of the quotes are easily found on several sites. I am not going back to retrieve all of them but I will give you the first:

 

The Kenneth Clarke quote at http://euquestion.blogspot.com/2016/06/

 

Ref for this: I look forward to the day when the Westminster Parliament is just a council chamber in Europe." — Kenneth Clarke, Conservative Chancellor in International Currency Review Vol 23 No 4 1996 

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, nauseus said:

All of the quotes are easily found on several sites. I am not going back to retrieve all of them but I will give you the first:

 

The Kenneth Clarke quote at http://euquestion.blogspot.com/2016/06/

 

Ref for this: I look forward to the day when the Westminster Parliament is just a council chamber in Europe." — Kenneth Clarke, Conservative Chancellor in International Currency Review Vol 23 No 4 1996 

You clearly copied the quotes from one source and didn't rewrite the quotes yourself. Which source you used to copy the texts here?

 

Yes, I'm pushing this to see what sources you are actually using. If you quote text from another source, please show us the source as well. In that way we can also see the credibility of the source.

 

Go, get the source.