4 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

How does a referendum about continuing membership differ in essence from one about joining? The individual will decide whether they think that being a member of the EU is a good thing or not.

 

 

I have not suggested otherwise (although what the result of a hypothetical election would have been is, of course, pure conjecture).

 

I can't believe that you asked that first question. The act of signing up without a referendum skewed the whole thing. Politicians know that people get tired of too many changes - they rely on voter laziness and often get their way.

 

I am saying that to be able to decide fairly, then voters would have needed to read at least a good honest key point summary of the Treaty of Rome, then balancing that with what Heath & Co (and Powell) had to say - I know that Powell was not popular but he was neither devious nor a liar. In 1972 inside Parliament there was clearly a large split on the issue, which resulted in three readings and a very narrow win for Teddy - at the same time, a referendum might well have gone the other way.

6 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Signed under another installed closet Europhile, Major. NO referendum then either, was there??? Then ratification just scraped through in Parliament (again) after the Masstricht Rebels nearly got us out of the EU before it really started, because if the UK had stalled long enough then the EU would have had to kick the UK out in order to continue with their political project.

 

In our parliamentary democracy, the government has a mandate to make decisions on our behalf. As long as they stick to their basic manifesto commitments, then that system is fine by me.

Hypothetical as it is, your conclusion if the UK had not signed the Maastricht Treaty is completely wrong. Like the EU, there was no mechanism to remove a member state from the EC or EEC unless they wanted to leave.

4 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

In our parliamentary democracy, the government has a mandate to make decisions on our behalf. As long as they stick to their basic manifesto commitments, then that system is fine by me.

Hypothetical as it is, your conclusion if the UK had not signed the Maastricht Treaty is completely wrong. Like the EU, there was no mechanism to remove a member state from the EC or EEC unless they wanted to leave.

 

Just keep voting until we get it right, right? Like Lisbon. Pah!

4 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

I can't believe that you asked that first question. The act of signing up without a referendum skewed the whole thing. Politicians know that people get tired of too many changes - they rely on voter laziness and often get their way.

 

Why should it be skewed? Individuals should ask themselves the same basic question - 'Do I think that membership of the EU is beneficial for the UK? - and vote accordingly. If anything, asking for confirmation after joining should lead to a more informed vote as there is the experience of membership to take into account. 

 

4 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I am saying that to be able to decide fairly, then voters would have needed to read at least a good honest key point summary of the Treaty of Rome, then balancing that with what Heath & Co (and Powell) had to say - I know that Powell was not popular but he was neither devious nor a liar. In 1972 inside Parliament there was clearly a large split on the issue, which resulted in three readings and a very narrow win for Teddy - at the same time, a referendum might well have gone the other way.

 

Access to information was obviously not as widely available in the '70s as it is now, however, I imagine that the broadsheets contained a good deal of facts and informed opinion about the pros and cons of joining the EC.

The do gooders here in the UK Scream " but there coming from civil wars and fear of Persecution " Most of these like the Albanians, iraquis, Viets, and syrians are not fleeing wars there here for freebies. Starmer told the Albanian president to take em back he was told to sod off its your problem now. Theres a list circulating of all the crimes being comitted my illies here top are sex crimes by Afgahns they top the list.  One was jailed for raping a boy knowing he was going to be sent back to Afghan on his release his brief played the HRMC card saying he will face death if he is returned. He now lives happy as larry in his new house with his family broght over and all benefits that come with it, A qatari camel herder was let off because he didn;t understand how to respect a female.

15 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Just keep voting until we get it right, right? Like Lisbon. Pah!

 

Oh dear.

 

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. You must have forgotten that I stated in my previous post that the call for a "People's" vote lacked validity.

13 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

Why should it be skewed? Individuals should ask themselves the same basic question - 'Do I think that membership of the EU is beneficial for the UK? - and vote accordingly. If anything, asking for confirmation after joining should lead to a more informed vote as there is the experience of membership to take into account. 

 

 

Access to information was obviously not as widely available in the '70s as it is now, however, I imagine that the broadsheets contained a good deal of facts and informed opinion about the pros and cons of joining the EC.

 

1. Answered within my Q.

 

2. Yes it was very difficult to find much out. Several opinions in the press - all biased rather than factual - rather similar to the present.

 

Starmer is pro brexit.

14 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

Oh dear.

 

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. You must have forgotten that I stated in my previous post that the call for a "People's" vote lacked validity.

 

It was sarcasm of course.

 

But if the UK had not voted for Maastricht and held out, then I'm sure that the EC would have made things quite unbearable for the UK, so much so that it would have withdrawn anyway. As we can see now, the EU are good at bloody-minded belligerence.

Macron is a complete tool.

 

Even his own mother, sorry I mean wife, can't resist slapping him. 

 

11 hours ago, The Cyclist said:

 

This returns agreement ?
 

 

As 10 EU Countries have already written to the EU Commission, opposing the agreement, I will be surprised if the EU ratifies it.

 

And if it does, you can bet your house that the UK is being shafted.

 

And then there is this

 

 

Hermer and Starmer straight on the phone to their gang of Human Rights Parasites as soon as Macron left Downing Street.

100% the French will shaft the UK. Not only shaft us but expect the UK to pay hundreds of millions of pounds a year to the French for the privilege of being shafted. Why is that idiot Starmer going ahead with this.

Some inflammatory posts have been removed:

• Be polite and respectful to other users.
• Avoid flaming, trolling, or stalking other members.

Just a thought but perhaps if the country that made life unbearable  for another countries citizens by  bombing missile strikes etc. were made to acept their refugees it might stop them in the first place.

47 minutes ago, Bannoi said:

Just a thought but perhaps if the country that made life unbearable  for another countries citizens by  bombing missile strikes etc. were made to acept their refugees it might stop them in the first place.

 

   Which Countries are those ?

Which Countries have the UK been bombing ?

18 hours ago, ericbj said:

genuine refugees

Your personal new definition? 😂 

1 hour ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Which Countries are those ?

Which Countries have the UK been bombing ?

Iraq, Iran, Jemen, etc

11 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

It was sarcasm of course.

 

But if the UK had not voted for Maastricht and held out, then I'm sure that the EC would have made things quite unbearable for the UK, so much so that it would have withdrawn anyway. As we can see now, the EU are good at bloody-minded belligerence.

BS.

Who encouraged Zelensky to fight? The erratic narcissist B.J.

54 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

BS.

Who encouraged Zelensky to fight? The erratic narcissist B.J.

 

What are you  on about now?? Seek help.

1 hour ago, newbee2022 said:

Your personal new definition? 😂 

If you read it all you would have seen I gave both definition and examples.

 

Coming closer to home, here in Thailand, I have known many refugees, seeking acceptance by third countries.  Most were genuine, either through opposition to military rule or because of belonging to an ethnicity the regime sought to eliminate ("In ten years time you will not see a Karen outside a museum" - as a Burma Army general put it some decades ago).
But some merely sought a better life in the west.  By my definition an "economic refugee".

UK could learn from Thailand, all illegals should be arrested and put into detention centres where they stay until they pay the fare home, they paid large amounts to get there illegally. Barely feed them, no health care hand outs or free anything, it's whats called a deterrent.

15 hours ago, frank83628 said:

Clearly not, Putin is the strongestof them all and in the litteral sense too as he is a black belt in judo. Whip any of them. the US & western allies screwed Gorbachev over, Putin isnt letting that happen again

I think you need help, sunbeam...........🤥

2 hours ago, ericbj said:

If you read it all you would have seen I gave both definition and examples.

 

Coming closer to home, here in Thailand, I have known many refugees, seeking acceptance by third countries.  Most were genuine, either through opposition to military rule or because of belonging to an ethnicity the regime sought to eliminate ("In ten years time you will not see a Karen outside a museum" - as a Burma Army general put it some decades ago).
But some merely sought a better life in the west.  By my definition an "economic refugee".

.....if you would find yourself and the whole country in a bad economical situation for a long time.......you would stay there? 

Can't wait to read your honest reply

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

What are you  on about now?? Seek help.

Short memory of your's. Old age? Alzheimer?

18 hours ago, Sir Dude said:

You confused people would not like the real answer to that... hence why Reform UK is crushing it. If you are not Bristish, then I forgive your ignorance... but if you are from the UK, then you might as well vote for the Illiberal undemocrats with that opinion.

Oh dear. You couldn't have illustrated his point more perfectly.

Question dodged. Attack instigated.

Do you have an answer or not? It was a pretty simple straightforward question and the answer would be interesting.

Whats a lllberal undemorat Sir Dude ?

16 hours ago, BarraMarra said:

The do gooders here in the UK Scream " but there coming from civil wars and fear of Persecution " Most of these like the Albanians, iraquis, Viets, and syrians are not fleeing wars there here for freebies. Starmer told the Albanian president to take em back he was told to sod off its your problem now. Theres a list circulating of all the crimes being comitted my illies here top are sex crimes by Afgahns they top the list.  One was jailed for raping a boy knowing he was going to be sent back to Afghan on his release his brief played the HRMC card saying he will face death if he is returned. He now lives happy as larry in his new house with his family broght over and all benefits that come with it, A qatari camel herder was let off because he didn;t understand how to respect a female.

Please share a link to the man convicted for raping a boy knowing he was going to be sent back, then "playing the HMRC card", and then being given a new house, benefits, and having his family brought over. (Not sure what the revenue and customs department would have to do with anything, but always willing to learn).

Then please share a link of the charge against a camel herder and the ruling that he was acquitted because he "didn't know how to respect a female".

It's a clear forum rule, if you make claims you must provide a respectable link to the evidence or source. You obviously forgot, but you seem to be on top of these cases so it won't be hard to share your souce.

So please share these links, I promise I will read them with an open mind.

On 7/12/2025 at 6:56 AM, Patong2021 said:

From 2018 to 2024, citizens of six countries – Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, Albania, Syria,  have made up 70% of those crossing in small boats.[snip]

 

If you want to play the colonial game, at least  get the countries right.

Right, get the countries right and learn to count.

22 hours ago, The Cyclist said:

 

All sea going vessels, not just ships.

did you read the information, you mention SOLAS and the AI told you what SOLAS is, no mention of all sea vessels, why are you deflecting?? because it didn't support your narrative

1 hour ago, newbee2022 said:

Short memory of your's. Old age? Alzheimer?

 

Answer the question. Go on. Explain yourself. 

4 hours ago, newbee2022 said:

Iraq, Iran, Jemen, etc

 

  That was before most of the current boat people were even born . 

You can no longer keep using that excuse