The EU debate - Part III

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Status
Not open for further replies.
'First Brexit, then Trump and there is more of this to come!': Nigel Farage says 'poor darlings' Merkel and Obama are in denial over the public's rejection of the political establishment
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...on-political-establishment.html#ixzz4QWYzJg2t

The more they are in denial, and assume the public are stupid instead of realising that their ideology has been seen to be flawed, the quicker a better, more open, inclusive and equal society can be created.
 
There's a difference between having an open mind and letting any old crap in.

You're claiming that there's some dubious agenda behind the EU.
If there's some evidence of it, then provide it.
Saying it's there but you're not going to show anyone is just disingenuous.

I'm not claiming that at all, and it's closed minds like yours and the numpties that have replied to you in kind that mean it's pointless trying to elaborate on here.

You haven't actually said what your version of the background to the EU is.
 
I'm not claiming that at all, and it's closed minds like yours and the numpties that have replied to you in kind that mean it's pointless trying to elaborate on here.

You haven't actually said what your version of the background to the EU is.
What are you actually claiming, then?
 
It's bullshit!..

The EU began for the simple reason to try and stop wars between close neighbours in Europe.

In the City it was accepted that the single currency came about as a quid pro quo between France and Germany.

The idea of the single currency, and eventual political union, was French. The deal with Germany was that the French wouldn't raise too many objections to the reunification of Germany, something which historically they had reason to be apprehensive about, if Germany backed their idea for the single currency, and eventual political union.

The comments about war were similar to Cameron's claim, and rather than being a main reason, it was a vehicle to push a scheme to unite the major industries, such as steel and coal and federalise Europe, that had been pushed in one form or another since the 20's by Monnet.
 
What are you actually claiming, then?

That the background to the EU is worth looking into with an open mind, and that the approach of some posters on this forum mean it's pointless trying to discuss it on here.
 
Harold Macmillan, backed by the USA first pushed their NWO dreams so as to preempt the perceived threats of a power play by a coalition of German/French nationalists. De Gaulle sussed them out and vetoed the UK from joining the EEC and we had to wait for Heath to con us into signing up.

The EU is not a democratic institution by any stretch of the imagination, nor was it ever intended to be. Look at how many democratically elected European leaders the EU elite has ousted so far? Maggie Thatcher's being their largest scalp to date.

If anyone is truly interested to know the truth about the EU's conception, start by looking at Jean Monnet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DMD
The comments about war were similar to Cameron's claim, and rather than being a main reason, it was a vehicle to push a scheme to unite the major industries, such as steel and coal and federalise Europe, that had been pushed in one form or another since the 20's by Monnet.

I've said consistently that whilst I believe the EU works well as a trading partnership, and it follows that many laws have to be standardized over the community, the current status of the single currency is not workable over any length of time.

Neither would I support complete political union. An idea which is currently a dead duck. There is close to zero appetite for it amongst the people of Europe.
 
Harold Macmillan, backed by the USA first pushed their NWO dreams so as to preempt the perceived threats of a power play by a coalition of German/French nationalists. De Gaulle sussed them out and vetoed the UK from joining the EEC and we had to wait for Heath to con us into signing up.

The EU is not a democratic institution by any stretch of the imagination, nor was it ever intended to be. Look at how many democratically elected European leaders the EU elite has ousted so far? Maggie Thatcher's being their largest scalp to date.

If anyone is truly interested to know the truth about the EU's conception, start by looking at Jean Monnet.

The EU elite ousted Thatcher??...

WTF are you babbling about??...

More loopy conspiracy theories!...
 
I've said consistently that whilst I believe the EU works well as a trading partnership, and it follows that many laws have to be standardized over the community, the current status of the single currency is not workable over any length of time.

Neither would I support complete political union. An idea which is currently a dead duck. There is close to zero appetite for it amongst the people of Europe.

We argree on a lot. We'd probably find a lot more agreement if there was a conversation rather than a series of challenges and rebuttals.

The opinions of the people of Europe conflict with the goals of the EU. The EU don't change their goals, only the presentation and timing.

It's one of the reasons I say that a remain vote would have emboldened them, and the timings would change. If they don't wake up to the reality, or get their presentation and timing wrong, the EU is in big difficulties.

The US vote and other global factors such as Asia, mean that we are in a good position to take advantage of the many deals that are there to be done.
 
We argree on a lot. We'd probably find a lot more agreement if there was a conversation rather than a series of challenges and rebuttals.

The opinions of the people of Europe conflict with the goals of the EU. The EU don't change their goals, only the presentation and timing.

It's one of the reasons I say that a remain vote would have emboldened them, and the timings would change. If they don't wake up to the reality, or get their presentation and timing wrong, the EU is in big difficulties.

The US vote and other global factors such as Asia, mean that we are in a good position to take advantage of the many deals that are there to be done.

I would only add before I get on with my Sunday that I still believe the vote to leave was the wrong decision at the wrong time.

The EU leaders are not completely blind or stupid. A narrow remain vote would have sent clear warning to them that there was major dissent, and to tread carefully. We would also have still had a seat at the table to help bring about the changes that I believe are not only necessary, but inevitable.

The US vote was the result of the democrats fielding an unsuitable, unbelievable, untrustworthy candidate.

Trump bullshitted his way to the presidency. Any half way competent, believable opponent would have seen him soundly defeated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stan
Harold Macmillan, backed by the USA first pushed their NWO dreams so as to preempt the perceived threats of a power play by a coalition of German/French nationalists. De Gaulle sussed them out and vetoed the UK from joining the EEC and we had to wait for Heath to con us into signing up.

The EU is not a democratic institution by any stretch of the imagination, nor was it ever intended to be. Look at how many democratically elected European leaders the EU elite has ousted so far? Maggie Thatcher's being their largest scalp to date.

If anyone is truly interested to know the truth about the EU's conception, start by looking at Jean Monnet.

That's what the EU do. They're a group of left-wing militia who march into parliaments and try to drag away all the great right-wing leaders.

Nothing to do with being ousted by her own MPs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: paultheplug
I would only add before I get on with my Sunday that I still believe the vote to leave was the wrong decision at the wrong time.

The EU leaders are not completely blind or stupid. A narrow remain vote would have sent clear warning to them that there was major dissent, and to tread carefully. We would also have still had a seat at the table to help bring about the changes that I believe are not only necessary, but inevitable.

The US vote was the result of the democrats fielding an unsuitable, unbelievable, untrustworthy candidate.

Trump bullshitted his way to the presidency. Any half way competent, believable opponent would have seen him soundly defeated.

The EU leaders have gone through the stages of grief, with denial and anger etc, and are starting to realise that they need to do something. My bet is that the something will be to readjust the message, when wisdom would suggest it's time to reassess the goal.

A narrow vote to remain, would be a vote to remain, I don't think they'd take on board the meaning and implications of the ratio.

The choice of US democrat candidate highlighted the lack of understanding of people waking up to the con that is their ideology, and that Clinton is the poster girl for. Her choice meant that Trump was the ideal opposition to her.

The media are big losers in all this too, because they have been shown to be almost canvassing on behalf of one side, ignoring their deceit and changes in policy, yet trying to accuse Trump of things that Clinton is far, far more guilty of.
 
Stan's Sunday morning paper round up.

The Daily Kustard is reporting bat **** nonsense designed to scare old ladies and dimwitted simpletons

What is Merkel trying to tell May as she uses ‘SECRET ILLUMINATI SIGN' at key world talks?
 
The Daily Saxton is reporting that Nigel Farage will once again look for a constituency that has enough ****s in one place to vote him into Parliament. A spokesman for Paddy Power said "if you think we'd take any bets on it being Hull then you're an even bigger **** than Farage".

Nigel Farage makes new comeback bid: Acting Ukip leader rips up pledge to quit frontline politics as he vows to forge new alliance with Donald Trump and fight for a Commons seat
 
  • Like
Reactions: NSIS
Status
Not open for further replies.