Bill Gates says Brexit would make Britain ‘significantly less attractive
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Jebedee
It is irrelevant if you feel we are a founding nation of the EU because it only matters how much power we have in it, which is almost none. Certainly not in line with the amount of wealth we bring it.
Again - sweeping statements. Do you have any evidence that we bring more wealth to the EU than visa versa? Are you really saying that the 45% of exports to the EU us worthless compared to say the 18% exports to the US, or 2.5% to China? I can't help feeling that this emotional need to feel like we are independent (even though when we leave there will be no real change) is clouding the simple economic fact that we benefit immensely from being a part of the EU.
Original post by ByEeek
Again - sweeping statements. Do you have any evidence that we bring more wealth to the EU than visa versa? Are you really saying that the 45% of exports to the EU us worthless compared to say the 18% exports to the US, or 2.5% to China? I can't help feeling that this emotional need to feel like we are independent (even though when we leave there will be no real change) is clouding the simple economic fact that we benefit immensely from being a part of the EU.
https://fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/
I can show you evidence to support my side and I'm sure you can just as easily find a source to back up your side. So there is no definitive clarity either way. For me that is a reason to leave as obfuscation of the truth is rarely for a good cause.
Original post by Jebedee
https://fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/
I can show you evidence to support my side and I'm sure you can just as easily find a source to back up your side. So there is no definitive clarity either way. For me that is a reason to leave as obfuscation of the truth is rarely for a good cause.
I can show you evidence to support my side and I'm sure you can just as easily find a source to back up your side. So there is no definitive clarity either way. For me that is a reason to leave as obfuscation of the truth is rarely for a good cause.
I will see your biased facts and raise you an unbiased response that has been fact checking leave and remain campaigners. You have to listen though. Over to the Undercover Economist, Tim Harford.
The cost to the UK in pure money terms
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07gv98b
And the cost / benefit of regulation
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07hjy4z
I was interested to discover that Farage was absolutely right that we have been outvoted 55 times in the last few years. However, I was surprised to discover that we won over 2000 measures we approved of. There was also a brilliant debunking of the myth about thousands of rules governing the sale of cabbages which actually came from a WW2 US mandate to control the sale of cabbage seeds.
Original post by ByEeek
I will see your biased facts and raise you an unbiased response that has been fact checking leave and remain campaigners. You have to listen though. Over to the Undercover Economist, Tim Harford.
The cost to the UK in pure money terms
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07gv98b
And the cost / benefit of regulation
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07hjy4z
I was interested to discover that Farage was absolutely right that we have been outvoted 55 times in the last few years. However, I was surprised to discover that we won over 2000 measures we approved of. There was also a brilliant debunking of the myth about thousands of rules governing the sale of cabbages which actually came from a WW2 US mandate to control the sale of cabbage seeds.
The cost to the UK in pure money terms
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07gv98b
And the cost / benefit of regulation
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07hjy4z
I was interested to discover that Farage was absolutely right that we have been outvoted 55 times in the last few years. However, I was surprised to discover that we won over 2000 measures we approved of. There was also a brilliant debunking of the myth about thousands of rules governing the sale of cabbages which actually came from a WW2 US mandate to control the sale of cabbage seeds.
Your unbiased media outlet of choice is the BBC...hmm.
That's funny, so basically we get what we want all of the time when we agree with them, and none of the times when we disagree. Not the best way to go forward in an economic relationship is it? I'm wondering if relationship is the right world, more like battered ginger step-child.
Not really interested in the cabbage myth, if I'm honest I hadn't even heard of it.
the leave campaign in its entirety has proven how much democracy have given stupid people so much power.
Original post by Jebedee
Your unbiased media outlet of choice is the BBC...hmm.
That's funny, so basically we get what we want all of the time when we agree with them, and none of the times when we disagree. Not the best way to go forward in an economic relationship is it? I'm wondering if relationship is the right world, more like battered ginger step-child.
Not really interested in the cabbage myth, if I'm honest I hadn't even heard of it.
That's funny, so basically we get what we want all of the time when we agree with them, and none of the times when we disagree. Not the best way to go forward in an economic relationship is it? I'm wondering if relationship is the right world, more like battered ginger step-child.
Not really interested in the cabbage myth, if I'm honest I hadn't even heard of it.
By them you mean the majority of the European parliament. And yes, that's how democracy works - if you disagree with the majority then you lose the vote, doesn't mean you're the abused child as you've put it.
Original post by Stiff Little Fingers
By them you mean the majority of the European parliament. And yes, that's how democracy works - if you disagree with the majority then you lose the vote, doesn't mean you're the abused child as you've put it.
Well I hope the remainers share that sentiment if they don't get the result they hoped for on thursday. I'm sure they'll all go home quietly and amicably...
Spoiler
Original post by Jebedee
Well I hope the remainers share that sentiment if they don't get the result they hoped for on thursday. I'm sure they'll all go home quietly and amicably...
Spoiler
If the vote goes leave on Thursday I'll be more bothered about planning to ride out the financial crash leaving will cause, and looking at what passport requirements are going to be for Scotland when it inevitably leaves (remain leading massively up there - an out vote will essentially trigger another indyref) so I can keep the benefits of the EU tbh.
Why vote remain? as I have said elsewhere the problem with the EU is that everyone wanted a car and they went and built a house, David Cameron wants to put wheels on the wall and say it is going to work. They are trying to construct something that was not asked for by the public.
Think about the comparison between how much information you have on your own national politics; a thousand hours worth online, in the media, radio etc to get across what they are doing and what it truly means, the EU? about one hour equivalent. They don't have to account to the people, when Cameron went to them to get a handful of changes, Junker waggled his finger and said 'he better not ask for this' 'Britain had better think it is getting...' - They are kings and king-makers, Europe created a new dynasty; unelected and unaccountable.
Think about the comparison between how much information you have on your own national politics; a thousand hours worth online, in the media, radio etc to get across what they are doing and what it truly means, the EU? about one hour equivalent. They don't have to account to the people, when Cameron went to them to get a handful of changes, Junker waggled his finger and said 'he better not ask for this' 'Britain had better think it is getting...' - They are kings and king-makers, Europe created a new dynasty; unelected and unaccountable.
Original post by Jebedee
Your unbiased media outlet of choice is the BBC...hmm.
That's funny, so basically we get what we want all of the time when we agree with them, and none of the times when we disagree. Not the best way to go forward in an economic relationship is it? I'm wondering if relationship is the right world, more like battered ginger step-child.
Not really interested in the cabbage myth, if I'm honest I hadn't even heard of it.
That's funny, so basically we get what we want all of the time when we agree with them, and none of the times when we disagree. Not the best way to go forward in an economic relationship is it? I'm wondering if relationship is the right world, more like battered ginger step-child.
Not really interested in the cabbage myth, if I'm honest I hadn't even heard of it.
Well if putting two sides of a story isn't unbiased, I am not quite sure what is. Any evidence to suggest the broadcast (by a non-BBC employee) is biased?
Anyone who opposes or deviates from the socialist system will be ostracised. For example, when the Austrian people had the temerity to elect `the wrong sort of Government' (it was considered too nationalistic and right wing by the EU) the EU pronounced the new Government unacceptable. With apparent magnanimity, the EU announced that it would `accept' an Italian President elected by the Italian people. All sorts of tricks are used to isolate and marginalise those who opposed the EU. Those questioning the EU are often portrayed as insular and parochial.
2. Like the USSR, the EU is governed by a group of people who appoint one another, are unaccountable to the public, enjoy generous salaries, massive perks and huge pensions, are pretty much above the law and cannot be sacked. The EU, like any committed socialist government, operates without any real feedback from the people, and certainly without any concern for what the people think. The state must always come first. The only people who benefit (as with all socialist and fascist organisations - and the two are, of course, interchangeable) are those who have put themselves and their friends in charge. The workers never really benefit from socialism. The profits of the hard working, the creative and the thrifty are redistributed to the bureaucracy: the lazy, the unthinking and the wasteful.
The central planners (in the case of the USSR they were in Moscow, in the case of the EU they are in Brussels) insist on making all the judgements and decisions but their lack of experience means that they get everything wrong so there are constant shortages and black markets.
State socialism in the EU has not led to affluence, equality and freedom but, effectively, to a one-party political system. (All three main parties in Britain support the EU and the destruction of Britain). The fascist EU has,inevitably, created a massive bureaucracy, heavy-handed secret police, government control of the media and endless secrecy and lies.
The socialist bureaucracy of the EU is run by people who arrogantly believe that they are the only ones who need to know and that they always know best.
3. There was one political party in the USSR (and no opposition) and the same is true of the EU. Political parties which don't support the EU are denied the oxygen of financial support. Politicians who do support the EU can look forward to good jobs (when they retire or leave domestic politics they may, like Neil Kinnock or Chris Patten, get jobs as EU commissioners). The system looks after its own. When the EU constitution was being debated, the main sticking point among delegates was not the sovereignty of their individual nations, or the rights of the voters, but the number of delegates each country would be allowed to send to EU meetings. Each nation's individuality was pushed to one side as irrelevant and inconsequential, in favour of the rights of politicians to attend regular, all expenses paid beanos.
4. Like the USSR, the EU was created with little or no respect for normal democratic principles. Much of what has happened within the EU has happened secretly and without the normal principles of democracy being considered or applied. What has happened over the last few decades has happened largely in secret.
5. Instead of information about the EU we have been fed a good deal of propaganda. The bureaucrats organise and control people and they try to control the availability of knowledge. The people are always controlled with lies and misinformation. (Today these are known as `spin'.) Anyone who dares to oppose the EU or to promote England is likely to be described as a `racist'. My book England Our England has proved enormously popular with readers (and was, within the first year, reprinted numerous times) but advertisements for the book were banned by a number of publications. Although the book is one of Britain's bestselling books on politics, it has never been reviewed in any national newspaper.
Very few Britons realise exactly what has already happened, how what has happened has already affected their lives and how things will now develop unless we do something very soon. A poll quietly taken for Britain's Foreign Office showed that a quarter of Britons did not know that their country was already a member of the EU. Astonishingly, 7% of Britons thought that the USA was a member. This ignorance isn't unique to Britain. A poll in Germany showed that 31% of the public had never heard of the European Commission.
The bureaucrats realise that until there is more awareness of and interest in what has happened, and what is happening, there are unlikely to be any protests.
6. The former USSR was renowned for its vast number of laws, rules and regulations. But the USSR was nothing compared to the EU. The EC has become a law factory covering everything imaginable and enabling small petty-minded bureaucrats to hound small businesses and flex their puny muscles. One law on fire regulations alone cost UK businesses £8 billion. New regulations have poured out governing every aspect of our lives, and businessmen have been swamped by an avalanche of red tape.
Dairy farmers have been subjected, in the last few years alone, to 1,100 separate, specific new laws. Even teddy bear manufacturers have been targeted.
Huge numbers of new criminal offenses have been listed.
It is true that these new laws have to be debated by MEPs but the debates are managed at a such frenetic rate - with MEPs voting on as many as 400 issues in just 90 minutes - that in practice the laws proposed by the bureaucrats are just nodded through. Speakers in the European Parliament are allowed 90 seconds to read out prepared speeches. And then the voting begins.
There are so many new laws that the British Government cannot study them all. The Council of Ministers cannot even read the new laws which the EU passes. The real power now lies with faceless, nameless, unelected bureaucrats who have no accountability whatsoever.
The unknown bureaucrats in Brussels are so desperate to extend their own power and authority, that they have, through the production of miles and miles of unwanted red tape, effectively destroyed the European economy.
Our special tragedy is that Britain's economy has suffered more than most from these new laws.
The other big European nations (France, Germany and Italy) just ignore the rules they don't like. Both France and Germany have flagrantly broken the rules on government deficits but for these two countries there have been no sanctions, no fines and no penalties. `These are for smaller countries,' said a French Government spokesman with typical gallic arrogance. The French have ignored hundreds of directives relating to the single market (directives which Britain, of course, has obeyed slavishly). Commenting on why he had, like so many other Britons, bought a home in France, Lord Nigel Lawson (former Chancellor) said he'd bought it because it was such a relief to get away from the EU.
Britain, of course, obeys all the rules. And British people and British businessmen pay the ever increasing price.
7. It was a crime for individual countries to talk about quitting the USSR. Indeed, there was no procedure to enable countries to leave the soviet union. The EU is much the same.
8. Corruption usually starts from the bottom and works its way up through the system. In both the USSR and the EU the corruption starts at the top and works its way down. Corruption was systemic in the old USSR and it is systemic in the EU. The EU is riddled with the standard socialist form of corruption where the protagonists live by the motto: `what is yours is mine and what is mine is mine and I will chop your hands off if you try to take it'. This was the popular way of doing things in the USSR. Like the USSR, the EU operates in a way that ensures the redistribution of wealth. In both cases the system means that the wealth is redistributed from the workers to the bureaucrats.
9. Like a pyramid selling scheme the USSR needed to be aggressive and to continue growing in order to stay alive. If it stopped growing it would fail. The EU is the same. It makes absolutely no economic sense for the EU to take in small, poor countries. The countries encouraged to join the EU in 2004 were welcomed for ideological rather than economic reasons. The six original members of the Common Market have slowly become 25. And then how many will there be? The bureaucracy needs to grow to justify its existence and its demands for increasing amounts of money. All bureaucracies like to grow. It is, in part, their raison d'etre. As they grow so they become increasingly important. Assistants can have assistants of their own. Secretaries can have secretaries. The politicians of the existing countries are persuaded that if the EU grows they will have bigger markets. No one bothers about the fact that the new countries which join the EU will want to share in the subsidies which the EU hands out. Countries like the UK, which pay money to be members of the EU, will have to pay more money for even less reason.
The language problems are enormous. In the new EU there are hundreds of translation combinations. The EU now works like a series of Chinese whispers. Speakers in, say, Finnish are translated first into English and then into another language and then into a fourth language.
The new countries coming into the EU have many different cultures and laws. Just how they are going to fit into one superstate is something only the bureaucrats who have planned the whole thing can explain. (And, as always, they aren't talking.)
For example, consider Turkey, one of the new EU proposed members. Under Turkish law, if a rapist marries his victim he can walk free. The basis for this is that nobody would want to marry a girl who is not a virgin and so the rapist is doing the girl a favour.
Turkish law also allows a mother who murders her child to be given a reduced sentence if the baby was born out of wedlock.
Another Turkish law rules that kidnapping a married woman is a greater crime than kidnapping a woman who isn't married.
The Turkish authorities arrested a young journalist simply on suspicion of being linked to a banned political party. For this, she was sentenced to over 12 years in prison.
I mention all this not in criticism but simply to show just how much difference there is between Turkish culture and British culture. And yet the Turks and the British are expected to be citizens of the same 450 million citizen country; supposedly sharing customs, mores and laws. Naturally, all governments want harmonisation to be organised on their own terms.
(The Americans, incidentally, are desperate for Turkey to join the EU. They believe that if this happens it will make it impossible for Bin Laden and others to claim that the EU is another `Christian Superstate'.)
10. In the former USSR the citizens of individual countries were told that they should forget about their former national identities. They should, they were told, consider themselves members of the USSR rather than citizens of Ukraine or Russia. Exactly the same thing is happening in the EU superstate.
The EU is intent on destroying and absorbing national states. Britain and England will both disappear completely as the EU superstate develops its identity.
11. The USSR was an ideological dictatorship. That is what the EU is. The aim of the EU is the formation of a state, the preservation of socialism within the state and the expansion of the principles of political correctness. Most political groups which oppose the EU are small, and will remain small, because it is virtually impossible to obtain funding or publicity for any group which opposes the EU.
In the UK there are just three main parties - all of which are supportive of the EU. This is manifestly unfair since it means that a majority of the British population must inevitably remain unrepresented.
Organisations which represent national interests (particularly English interests) are denied power, money and publicity on the grounds that they must be racist. Anyone who supports Britain or England will find themselves branded a racist. (Supporters of Wales and Scotland are never accused of being racist since both these countries will still exist as regions in the new EU superstate.)
12. The USSR had a gulag and so does the EU. The EU has an intellectual gulag; if your views differ from the `approved' views you will find it difficult to get them published.
Naturally, those who disapprove of the EU will find it difficult or impossible to obtain a job working for the EU. Making a speech or writing a book which criticises the EU (or the laws of the EU) may be regarded as a crime if it is considered subversive. (It is, of course, up to the bureaucrats of the EU to decide whether or not something is `subversive'.) One Englishman made the mistake of standing up at a public meeting and defending the rights and freedoms of English country people. As a result of his comments two police officers visited the speaker's home, arrested him (refusing to tell him why) took him to a police station and threw him into a cell.
When five Britons visited Brussels and drove around the city in vehicles which were decorated with posters which called for a referendum on the EU constitution they were arrested for `disturbing public order' and `demonstrating without permission'.
13. Citizens in the old USSR had to carry ID cards. The loss of civil liberties which this entailed used to be regarded with suspicion and some contempt by Western European democracies. In the new EU, citizens are losing their freedom and must carry ID cards. (It is a myth that ID cards contribute anything whatsoever to national security. ID cards always exist for one reason only: to take away the freedoms and civil liberties of the citizens who must carry them.)
It is very easy to lose your freedom, but very difficult to get it back.
14. Officers in the new EU police force have even greater privileges than officers in the much feared KGB. All members of the new EU police force have diplomatic immunity. They can walk into your home, arrest you, beat you up and steal your property and you cannot do a darned thing about it. Now do you believe me when I say that the EU is a fascist organisation?
Posted from TSR Mobile
2. Like the USSR, the EU is governed by a group of people who appoint one another, are unaccountable to the public, enjoy generous salaries, massive perks and huge pensions, are pretty much above the law and cannot be sacked. The EU, like any committed socialist government, operates without any real feedback from the people, and certainly without any concern for what the people think. The state must always come first. The only people who benefit (as with all socialist and fascist organisations - and the two are, of course, interchangeable) are those who have put themselves and their friends in charge. The workers never really benefit from socialism. The profits of the hard working, the creative and the thrifty are redistributed to the bureaucracy: the lazy, the unthinking and the wasteful.
The central planners (in the case of the USSR they were in Moscow, in the case of the EU they are in Brussels) insist on making all the judgements and decisions but their lack of experience means that they get everything wrong so there are constant shortages and black markets.
State socialism in the EU has not led to affluence, equality and freedom but, effectively, to a one-party political system. (All three main parties in Britain support the EU and the destruction of Britain). The fascist EU has,inevitably, created a massive bureaucracy, heavy-handed secret police, government control of the media and endless secrecy and lies.
The socialist bureaucracy of the EU is run by people who arrogantly believe that they are the only ones who need to know and that they always know best.
3. There was one political party in the USSR (and no opposition) and the same is true of the EU. Political parties which don't support the EU are denied the oxygen of financial support. Politicians who do support the EU can look forward to good jobs (when they retire or leave domestic politics they may, like Neil Kinnock or Chris Patten, get jobs as EU commissioners). The system looks after its own. When the EU constitution was being debated, the main sticking point among delegates was not the sovereignty of their individual nations, or the rights of the voters, but the number of delegates each country would be allowed to send to EU meetings. Each nation's individuality was pushed to one side as irrelevant and inconsequential, in favour of the rights of politicians to attend regular, all expenses paid beanos.
4. Like the USSR, the EU was created with little or no respect for normal democratic principles. Much of what has happened within the EU has happened secretly and without the normal principles of democracy being considered or applied. What has happened over the last few decades has happened largely in secret.
5. Instead of information about the EU we have been fed a good deal of propaganda. The bureaucrats organise and control people and they try to control the availability of knowledge. The people are always controlled with lies and misinformation. (Today these are known as `spin'.) Anyone who dares to oppose the EU or to promote England is likely to be described as a `racist'. My book England Our England has proved enormously popular with readers (and was, within the first year, reprinted numerous times) but advertisements for the book were banned by a number of publications. Although the book is one of Britain's bestselling books on politics, it has never been reviewed in any national newspaper.
Very few Britons realise exactly what has already happened, how what has happened has already affected their lives and how things will now develop unless we do something very soon. A poll quietly taken for Britain's Foreign Office showed that a quarter of Britons did not know that their country was already a member of the EU. Astonishingly, 7% of Britons thought that the USA was a member. This ignorance isn't unique to Britain. A poll in Germany showed that 31% of the public had never heard of the European Commission.
The bureaucrats realise that until there is more awareness of and interest in what has happened, and what is happening, there are unlikely to be any protests.
6. The former USSR was renowned for its vast number of laws, rules and regulations. But the USSR was nothing compared to the EU. The EC has become a law factory covering everything imaginable and enabling small petty-minded bureaucrats to hound small businesses and flex their puny muscles. One law on fire regulations alone cost UK businesses £8 billion. New regulations have poured out governing every aspect of our lives, and businessmen have been swamped by an avalanche of red tape.
Dairy farmers have been subjected, in the last few years alone, to 1,100 separate, specific new laws. Even teddy bear manufacturers have been targeted.
Huge numbers of new criminal offenses have been listed.
It is true that these new laws have to be debated by MEPs but the debates are managed at a such frenetic rate - with MEPs voting on as many as 400 issues in just 90 minutes - that in practice the laws proposed by the bureaucrats are just nodded through. Speakers in the European Parliament are allowed 90 seconds to read out prepared speeches. And then the voting begins.
There are so many new laws that the British Government cannot study them all. The Council of Ministers cannot even read the new laws which the EU passes. The real power now lies with faceless, nameless, unelected bureaucrats who have no accountability whatsoever.
The unknown bureaucrats in Brussels are so desperate to extend their own power and authority, that they have, through the production of miles and miles of unwanted red tape, effectively destroyed the European economy.
Our special tragedy is that Britain's economy has suffered more than most from these new laws.
The other big European nations (France, Germany and Italy) just ignore the rules they don't like. Both France and Germany have flagrantly broken the rules on government deficits but for these two countries there have been no sanctions, no fines and no penalties. `These are for smaller countries,' said a French Government spokesman with typical gallic arrogance. The French have ignored hundreds of directives relating to the single market (directives which Britain, of course, has obeyed slavishly). Commenting on why he had, like so many other Britons, bought a home in France, Lord Nigel Lawson (former Chancellor) said he'd bought it because it was such a relief to get away from the EU.
Britain, of course, obeys all the rules. And British people and British businessmen pay the ever increasing price.
7. It was a crime for individual countries to talk about quitting the USSR. Indeed, there was no procedure to enable countries to leave the soviet union. The EU is much the same.
8. Corruption usually starts from the bottom and works its way up through the system. In both the USSR and the EU the corruption starts at the top and works its way down. Corruption was systemic in the old USSR and it is systemic in the EU. The EU is riddled with the standard socialist form of corruption where the protagonists live by the motto: `what is yours is mine and what is mine is mine and I will chop your hands off if you try to take it'. This was the popular way of doing things in the USSR. Like the USSR, the EU operates in a way that ensures the redistribution of wealth. In both cases the system means that the wealth is redistributed from the workers to the bureaucrats.
9. Like a pyramid selling scheme the USSR needed to be aggressive and to continue growing in order to stay alive. If it stopped growing it would fail. The EU is the same. It makes absolutely no economic sense for the EU to take in small, poor countries. The countries encouraged to join the EU in 2004 were welcomed for ideological rather than economic reasons. The six original members of the Common Market have slowly become 25. And then how many will there be? The bureaucracy needs to grow to justify its existence and its demands for increasing amounts of money. All bureaucracies like to grow. It is, in part, their raison d'etre. As they grow so they become increasingly important. Assistants can have assistants of their own. Secretaries can have secretaries. The politicians of the existing countries are persuaded that if the EU grows they will have bigger markets. No one bothers about the fact that the new countries which join the EU will want to share in the subsidies which the EU hands out. Countries like the UK, which pay money to be members of the EU, will have to pay more money for even less reason.
The language problems are enormous. In the new EU there are hundreds of translation combinations. The EU now works like a series of Chinese whispers. Speakers in, say, Finnish are translated first into English and then into another language and then into a fourth language.
The new countries coming into the EU have many different cultures and laws. Just how they are going to fit into one superstate is something only the bureaucrats who have planned the whole thing can explain. (And, as always, they aren't talking.)
For example, consider Turkey, one of the new EU proposed members. Under Turkish law, if a rapist marries his victim he can walk free. The basis for this is that nobody would want to marry a girl who is not a virgin and so the rapist is doing the girl a favour.
Turkish law also allows a mother who murders her child to be given a reduced sentence if the baby was born out of wedlock.
Another Turkish law rules that kidnapping a married woman is a greater crime than kidnapping a woman who isn't married.
The Turkish authorities arrested a young journalist simply on suspicion of being linked to a banned political party. For this, she was sentenced to over 12 years in prison.
I mention all this not in criticism but simply to show just how much difference there is between Turkish culture and British culture. And yet the Turks and the British are expected to be citizens of the same 450 million citizen country; supposedly sharing customs, mores and laws. Naturally, all governments want harmonisation to be organised on their own terms.
(The Americans, incidentally, are desperate for Turkey to join the EU. They believe that if this happens it will make it impossible for Bin Laden and others to claim that the EU is another `Christian Superstate'.)
10. In the former USSR the citizens of individual countries were told that they should forget about their former national identities. They should, they were told, consider themselves members of the USSR rather than citizens of Ukraine or Russia. Exactly the same thing is happening in the EU superstate.
The EU is intent on destroying and absorbing national states. Britain and England will both disappear completely as the EU superstate develops its identity.
11. The USSR was an ideological dictatorship. That is what the EU is. The aim of the EU is the formation of a state, the preservation of socialism within the state and the expansion of the principles of political correctness. Most political groups which oppose the EU are small, and will remain small, because it is virtually impossible to obtain funding or publicity for any group which opposes the EU.
In the UK there are just three main parties - all of which are supportive of the EU. This is manifestly unfair since it means that a majority of the British population must inevitably remain unrepresented.
Organisations which represent national interests (particularly English interests) are denied power, money and publicity on the grounds that they must be racist. Anyone who supports Britain or England will find themselves branded a racist. (Supporters of Wales and Scotland are never accused of being racist since both these countries will still exist as regions in the new EU superstate.)
12. The USSR had a gulag and so does the EU. The EU has an intellectual gulag; if your views differ from the `approved' views you will find it difficult to get them published.
Naturally, those who disapprove of the EU will find it difficult or impossible to obtain a job working for the EU. Making a speech or writing a book which criticises the EU (or the laws of the EU) may be regarded as a crime if it is considered subversive. (It is, of course, up to the bureaucrats of the EU to decide whether or not something is `subversive'.) One Englishman made the mistake of standing up at a public meeting and defending the rights and freedoms of English country people. As a result of his comments two police officers visited the speaker's home, arrested him (refusing to tell him why) took him to a police station and threw him into a cell.
When five Britons visited Brussels and drove around the city in vehicles which were decorated with posters which called for a referendum on the EU constitution they were arrested for `disturbing public order' and `demonstrating without permission'.
13. Citizens in the old USSR had to carry ID cards. The loss of civil liberties which this entailed used to be regarded with suspicion and some contempt by Western European democracies. In the new EU, citizens are losing their freedom and must carry ID cards. (It is a myth that ID cards contribute anything whatsoever to national security. ID cards always exist for one reason only: to take away the freedoms and civil liberties of the citizens who must carry them.)
It is very easy to lose your freedom, but very difficult to get it back.
14. Officers in the new EU police force have even greater privileges than officers in the much feared KGB. All members of the new EU police force have diplomatic immunity. They can walk into your home, arrest you, beat you up and steal your property and you cannot do a darned thing about it. Now do you believe me when I say that the EU is a fascist organisation?
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by ByEeek
Well if putting two sides of a story isn't unbiased, I am not quite sure what is. Any evidence to suggest the broadcast (by a non-BBC employee) is biased?
Like the guy above explained, people's jobs are on the line if they dare speak against the EU so for that reason I am extremely sceptical of any pro-EU information that is put out. It might sound unfair but that is the consequence of such coercion tactics.
Who cares about Bill Gates
Original post by Jebedee
Like the guy above explained, people's jobs are on the line if they dare speak against the EU so for that reason I am extremely sceptical of any pro-EU information that is put out. It might sound unfair but that is the consequence of such coercion tactics.
Several of the jobs I used to have may well be on the line if we leave. It isn't that trade with the EU will stop over night, but it may well get harder. Companies don't like that kind of uncertainty hanging over their heads and will attempt to mitigate risks that could cause harm. So if I were importing from the UK, I would seek alternative suppliers in the EU even if they were more expensive to mitigate supply issues from a country undergoing massive change and political turmoil. And we are talking 45% of our exporters here, many of whom will be very small firms consisting of one or more people. Such is the ease of exporting to the EU, you don't have to have a huge legal department and overseas agents to do it. Why throw that away for a principal?
To quote Mary Poppins, I can't help but feel that many of the Leavers can't see past the end of their nose.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Rishi Sunak relaunches plans to send asylum seekers to Rwanda
- Liverpool uni accommodation
- Rwanda bill likely to be stalled at least till April after seven defeats in the Lords
- Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The Guardian
- Can immigration actually been controlled?
- Asylum seeker dies on bibby Stockholm barge
- Who regrets the outcome of Brexit??
- Should the royal family exist?
- Why do people constantly hate people with degrees ?
- Desire for net zero referendum growing among public, poll finds
- Should i vote Labour?
- French holocaust denier faces extradition from Scotland
- Nottingham vs Manchester
- GCSE Results Day 2023 National Remark for all students.
- Average salary of a commercial barrister
- Do you think that poor sociability is strongly correlated with failures in life?
- Kings College or Queen Mary??
- should i pay for the first date if i asked him out?
- Tractors converge at Westminster as farmers protest over food security
- Funding & Loans / Debt - MPhil
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
