General / Off-Topic EU Referendum (UK only) - to Brexit or not to Brexit
- Thread starter Caspar
- Start date
- Status
Javert
Volunteer Moderator
Possibly, but since this is the off topic section, there will just spring up another thread "Consequences of Brexit"
Of course you are right that we should listen to at least a full hour of Trumping before we make a comment, but it's difficult to listen to even just a minute without feeling a little nauseous. It is better to judge a man by his actions rather than his words, and the strong-arm tactics he was using to evict people from his Aberdeen golf course made me throw up a little in my mouth.
And it's difficult to see how a comment like "I will pay the legal fees of anyone that beats up that man" can be taken out of context, unless it's within a statement like "Any bright orange man-child who would say 'I will pay the legal fees of anyone that beats up that man' should be kept as far away from the nuclear button as possible"
Last edited:
that's nothing newThey had a democratic vote and i think it was like 90% (anyone has the correct numbers, please post) of people in Gibraltar wanted to stay in the UK. Spain would have to take unlawful action to get Gibraltar, unless Gibraltar has changed its mind.
It would be interesting to have a new thread on the theme would be, eg : "Brexit: Your impressions day by day after the found freedom"
Javert
Volunteer Moderator
Even though I don't necessarily agre with her decision, I think she deserves a lot of respect because it sounds like she voted on a principle, on a fact that was true (it is actually true that lots of EU personnel are paid more than the UK PM, although, this is probably distorted by various factors of exchange rates and average salaries and costs of living in different countries, not to mention that arguably shouldn't the president of a country of 500m people be paid more than the PM of a country of 60m).
Still, she voted on that principle in the knowledge that she was putting herself out of a job, so whether her logic was right or not, she put that principle ahead of her own welfare - perhaps more of us should take an example from just that part.
(I'm assuming she knew that she was putting herself out of a job if leave side won).
Javert
Volunteer Moderator
I'm missing the connection here. Why will leaving the EU result in an English parliament being created?
She is indeed courageous
By trying to make an example of Britain the EU are proving the point that they are a corrupt organisation that uses fear to keep its countries in line.
Although I did support remain in the vote I no longer feel comfortable being part of a Union held together by fear and threats of ruin for non compliance.
Although I did support remain in the vote I no longer feel comfortable being part of a Union held together by fear and threats of ruin for non compliance.
Do you want to leave the NATO too?
After all it's an organization which was and is held together by the fear of a russian aggression in Europe.
It's like John Oliver says.. The EU is a mess but we'd be stark raving bonkers to leave it.
I've absolutely no idea what should be done with the EU. I'm just an old man typing away in my armchair. If I had the brainpower to solve that puzzle I wouldn't be sitting here. I'd be designing matter transmitters and building faster-than-light spaceships.
i will have to catch up on that 'Aberdeen gold course' issue, new to me, but my focus has been narrowed over the last few days... is that a new things, i would like to check it out and see the full story.
trumps no angle
(Edit: angel, hehe, typos ) and he has said some stupid things, like you said "I will pay the legal fees of anyone that beats up that man". that was wrong for sure. Stupid of him to say,and looks like he was promoting violence on the surface.now if we are referring to 'Knock The Crap Out Of Them, I’ll Pay For Lawsuits' it was in reference to people throwing tomato at supporters. So he was saying if you are attacked, hit them back and i will pay for your legal cost. he did not say,' go out there and attack people , and i will pay for your legal cost'
He was saying, defend your self, and i will give you legal support... dosen't sound so bad when its properly research, but still a dumb move by trump
Last edited:
To be linked to something by the blackmail and the fear is a denial of démocatie and is worthy of the mafia
i will have to catch up on that 'Aberdeen gold course' issue, new to me, but my focus has been narrowed over the last few days... is that a new things, i would like to check it out and see the full story.
trumps no angle
now if we are referring to 'Knock The Crap Out Of Them, I’ll Pay For Lawsuits' it was in reference to people throwing tomato at supporters. So he was saying if you are attacked, hit them back and i will pay for your legal cost. he did not say,' go out there and attack people , and i will pay for your legal cost'
He was saying, defend your self, and i will give you legal support... dosen't sound so bad when its properly research, but still a dumb move by trump
Oh, I don't know. He seems pretty obtuse.
WOW Another hate group to be formed. LMAO To funny.
lol, i have word issues , i'm sure you know i meant angel. but i will let that typo stay, its funny
Sorry but I don't think this should pass unchallenged. In my view, the leave campaign conducted a far more dishonest campaign than remain, but obviously I may be biased as I was a remain supporter, so perhaps you could list out some of the lies that you saw on each side and we can assess them?
In a sense, using the word "lies" is a lie in itself - most official politicians rarely tell outright lies. What they do is tell you things that are "truthful lies". This involves using data and statistics, but twisting them in such a way as to invite the wrong conclusion.
Remain campaign were in some cases probably using worse case scenario or, arguably, exaggerating their case. However, I didn't see many cases where what they said was completely untrue or unlikely to happen, or trying to state the opposite of what the real facts were.
Leave campaign were distorting data in a massively more dishonest way in order to imply the exact opposite of what was really the case. To me, that is much worse than simply exaggerating the effect or simplifying it in order to make it understandable.
Examples:
Remain -
Treasury forecast about the potential impact of Brexit, George Osbourne translates the potential economic losses into an amount per person - yes this is misleading in that an economist would say you can't divide a GDP loss by the population and conclude that each person will be £137/month or whatever worse off. However, I strongly suspect if you go back and read the full speech that Osbourne made in context, you will find that it was put differently to the headlines that were created by Leave, and although you can't make such conclusion, you can reasonably conclude that a major hit to overall GDP will result in many people being worse off in real terms, so although the number itself is questionable, it is still inviting you to make an arguably correct conclusion.
(also, given that petrol and other things are already going up, in the long run it might turn out he was no far off
Leaving EU will start WW3 - this is, strangely enough, an outright lie (contrary to what I said above), but the lie was by the leave campaign. Cameron never even said this, but the leave campaign managed to make everyone think that he did. What he did do was point out that if the EU splits up, it is not likely to increase harmony, peace and stability in the world.
LEAVE:
We send 350m per week to Europe - highly misleading. They can say it's not a lie, because technically the invoice from Europe, before taking into account rebates and everything that comes back the other way, is 350m per week. However, note that it says "we send" rather than "the gross amount of our EU membership" - invites us to think that we are sending that amount.
We challenged the EU 72 times and lost ever time - another nice clever one which invites you to make the complete opposite conclusion to the truth. All this means is that we lost 72 out of 2400 votes. I won a PVP battle in ED 72 times therefore I am a fantastic PVP player (I won't mention that I lost 2400 battles). However, from a very distorted viewpoint the leave politician can say this statement is true. Every time we voted on the losing side, we lost (well duh!)
75% of UK law came from the EU - again, if you look at the data in a certain massively distorted way, you can claim that this is true, but, it is utterly and completely misleading of the real situation for a number of reasons. It invites you to believe that the EU is the UK government making UK law and this was complete nonsense. It also ignores the fact that the vast majority of these laws would probably be put in place anyway regardless whether we are in the EU or not.
I could go on, but as I said above, I may be biased so I would invite you to come up with the lies that you think the remain side told? I also suspect - and we will have to wait for long term analysis on this - that the way the "balanced" media has reported each campaign was unintentionally helpful to the leave side.
Now when we come to the unofficial word of mouth campaign, which I suspect is where a some of the decisions were made, I have seen real and total lies circulating around. One example - there's a post that's been going around on facebook with a huge list of factories that were closed in the UK and production moved to another country. Each one is followed by the phrase "with EU grant". The list is complete fabrication as none of the companies received an EU grant to move their facility from one country to another, some of the things on the list are made up, and the sites which did close would have happened anyway whether we were in the EU or not. This is a real lie. However if you follow through social media, you will find this post (and many others like it) repeated and shared all around, usually with nobody challenging it. Therefore people read the first few lines of it and believe that it's true. They actually believe that the EU is paying large companies to close factories in the UK and move the factory to (for example) Turkey (not even in the EU). I kid you not.
The unfortunate thing about it is that the massive reduction in UK manufacturing sites is driven by globalization and happening in most rich countries, and even if you think it's a bad thing, it is the UK government that should be entirely blamed - it is nothing whatsoever to do with the EU.
I've seen plenty of other examples of such lies circulating around social media and going unchallenged. The number of laws governing cabbages in the EU for example - there are no such laws.
Bottom line - the EU has been made a scapegoat for many things which have absolutely nothing to do with being in the EU or not, and therefore those things will not be changed once we have left.
I'm not going into a blow by blow account of who lied the most - in the end it comes down to "I only stabbed him 3 times m'lud, it was the other geezer who stabbed him 15 times". The point is the stabbing not the number of times it happened - everyone was down in the muck it's just that some tried to pretend they weren't.
The whole thing was based on lying or miss-leading by the politicians, the media and the supporters promoting one view or another.
The main difference between the two extremes seems to me was that the leave side at their worst were unapologetically obviously a-holes whereas the worst of the remain side were a-holes trying to dress their up as virtuous.
The narrative from the europhiles mostly seems to be not only are we right but everyone that disagrees with us is either defective in some way or a right wing fascist of some description or racist or xenophobic. Or worse right wing as if no evil in the world was/is ever perpetrated by anyone who isn't right wing.
They do love their political labels and can't even begin to comprehend that some people actually try and look at individual issues on their merits rather than whatever political tribe they think they belong to.
That said I'll agree that Farage was far and away the worst of the high profile figures on either side - but that's kind of obvious really.
I was planning to go for less cynical output today but I'm afraid I've allowed your post to trigger me!
So in the spirit of my original intentions here's a song;
[video=youtube;291ET6Py6H8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=291ET6Py6H8[/video]
Last edited:
Indeed, clearly a typo and I knew what you meant - but in these times of austerity, we cannot let any opportunity for a joke escape us.
i will have to catch up on that 'Aberdeen gold course' issue, new to me, but my focus has been narrowed over the last few days... is that a new things, i would like to check it out and see the full story.
trumps no angle
now if we are referring to 'Knock The Crap Out Of Them, I’ll Pay For Lawsuits' it was in reference to people throwing tomato at supporters. So he was saying if you are attacked, hit them back and i will pay for your legal cost. he did not say,' go out there and attack people , and i will pay for your legal cost'
He was saying, defend your self, and i will give you legal support... dosen't sound so bad when its properly research, but still a dumb move by trump
I guess "gold course" was a bit of a Freudian slit.
Here's a summary of the story..
http://fortune.com/2016/06/22/donald-trump-scotland-golf/
The bit of the article which gets me is..
Last edited:
Unbelievable ! One of the most asked questions on Google in the UK, following the Brexit is ... "What is the EU ?" ---- https://twitter.com/GoogleTrends/status/746303118820937728/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw ---- It is also true that in France we do not really know more
- Status