Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| Reply privately |
"Who really cares " I think the EU are gonna care if The 5 star movement and The League form any kind of coalition together because they are both Eurosceptic parties and The League want to take Italy out of the Euro! This would have serious consequences for the EU. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Who really cares I think the EU are gonna care if The 5 star movement and The League form any kind of coalition together because they are both Eurosceptic parties and The League want to take Italy out of the Euro! This would have serious consequences for the EU. " They recently ruled that option out. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"To be fair, the Italian economy is starting to show signs of recovery , but their economy is still a basket case. 30% youth unemployment, poor graduate employment, banks sitting on top of £170billion of toxic loans, and a public debt of 130% of GDP. What must concerns some, is the European rise of the centre right and far right politics. Is the UK the only EU country that seems to have a rise of leftist politics? " It should be a concern to everyone in the world when far right Nationalist political groups start to become popular. There is an inevitability about the ultimate consequences of near neighbours become ever more Nationalistic. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" What must concerns some, is the European rise of the centre right and far right politics. Is the UK the only EU country that seems to have a rise of leftist politics? " The government of Portugal is formed by parties from the left. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"To be fair, the Italian economy is starting to show signs of recovery , but their economy is still a basket case. 30% youth unemployment, poor graduate employment, banks sitting on top of £170billion of toxic loans, and a public debt of 130% of GDP. What must concerns some, is the European rise of the centre right and far right politics. Is the UK the only EU country that seems to have a rise of leftist politics? " Here are the figures of debt-to-GDP for the developed economies of the world. Italy has the 2nd poorest rating. The UK has the fifth poorest rating. United States $14.6 trillion 92.7 China $5.7 trillion 19.1 Japan $5.4 trillion 225.9 Germany $3.3 trillion 75.3 France $2.6 trillion 84.2 United Kingdom $2.3 trillion 76.7 Italy $2.0 trillion 118.4 Brazil $2.0 trillion 66.8 Canada $1.6 trillion 81.7 Russia $1.5 trillion 11.1 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"To be fair, the Italian economy is starting to show signs of recovery , but their economy is still a basket case. 30% youth unemployment, poor graduate employment, banks sitting on top of £170billion of toxic loans, and a public debt of 130% of GDP. What must concerns some, is the European rise of the centre right and far right politics. Is the UK the only EU country that seems to have a rise of leftist politics? " There was quite a good article about that recently- British leftists have abandoned "third way" centrism in a way that hasn't happened elsewhere and have presented an anti-establishment alternative. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. " You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. " The fact that the Italians are voting for the party of a man who himself was disbarred from political office for corruption sadly says something about Italians. He's lied to them before, but they like the lies. The 5 Star movement is already suffering from corruption allegations. Inevitable the closer it gets to power. As ever blaming everything on the EU will not solve anything. Exactly what we are learning here. Most problems are our own. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What must concerns some, is the European rise of the centre right and far right politics. Is the UK the only EU country that seems to have a rise of leftist politics? " The BBC/Sky et all have been pushing a left wing agenda for a long time now and the leftists and many youngsters of the UK are either to ignorant to do their own research, just believe what the MSM tell them, have seen the disgraceful scenes caused by left during their protests and fancy being part of some sort of "revolutionary" movement or it could be a combination of all three The left have spoke down to anyone who disagrees with them for far too long now and now that people are standing up to them with the power of a vote they cannot handle it. The fascism which is sweeping over the UK is very worrying and needs nipped in the bud pronto or the left wing are going to drag this country even further into the gutter than it already is I await patiently for the left to analyse my post and to pick out spelling and grammatical errors as this seems common practice after being called a racist by them | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What must concerns some, is the European rise of the centre right and far right politics. Is the UK the only EU country that seems to have a rise of leftist politics? The BBC/Sky et all have been pushing a left wing agenda for a long time now and the leftists and many youngsters of the UK are either to ignorant to do their own research, just believe what the MSM tell them, have seen the disgraceful scenes caused by left during their protests and fancy being part of some sort of "revolutionary" movement or it could be a combination of all three The left have spoke down to anyone who disagrees with them for far too long now and now that people are standing up to them with the power of a vote they cannot handle it. The fascism which is sweeping over the UK is very worrying and needs nipped in the bud pronto or the left wing are going to drag this country even further into the gutter than it already is I await patiently for the left to analyse my post and to pick out spelling and grammatical errors as this seems common practice after being called a racist by them" If you believe that MSM are left wing, you have a very skewed view of the world. Murdoch's Sky is about as left wing as Thatcher | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What must concerns some, is the European rise of the centre right and far right politics. Is the UK the only EU country that seems to have a rise of leftist politics? The BBC/Sky et all have been pushing a left wing agenda for a long time now and the leftists and many youngsters of the UK are either to ignorant to do their own research, just believe what the MSM tell them, have seen the disgraceful scenes caused by left during their protests and fancy being part of some sort of "revolutionary" movement or it could be a combination of all three The left have spoke down to anyone who disagrees with them for far too long now and now that people are standing up to them with the power of a vote they cannot handle it. The fascism which is sweeping over the UK is very worrying and needs nipped in the bud pronto or the left wing are going to drag this country even further into the gutter than it already is I await patiently for the left to analyse my post and to pick out spelling and grammatical errors as this seems common practice after being called a racist by them" The right doesn't patronise? What is the point that you are making? You don't like a socialist outlook and celebrate the voters reaction to it. At the same time don't like that the reaction is so far right wing? Does that not imply that the moderate right and centre has also failed? What is your news service of choice? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing?" . To be fair Slovakia has pretty much the same policies and thoughts as Hungary and Poland but is a left wing government. The reality is economically speaking, policy wise the left and the right don't really differ that much, they both use center ground past failures for they're own ends | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Of course we all know the reason why the Balkans and Eastern Europe have gone down this route don't we?. They don't want enforced Islamic immigration by EU mandate" Why is "Islamic immigration" different to any other immigration? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Of course we all know the reason why the Balkans and Eastern Europe have gone down this route don't we?. They don't want enforced Islamic immigration by EU mandate Why is "Islamic immigration" different to any other immigration?" . I think the last Islamic 'immigration" they had in that region is still ingrained in they're culture. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Of course we all know the reason why the Balkans and Eastern Europe have gone down this route don't we?. They don't want enforced Islamic immigration by EU mandate Why is "Islamic immigration" different to any other immigration?. I think the last Islamic 'immigration" they had in that region is still ingrained in they're culture. " Russian "immigration" both physically and politically a more recent and pertinent concern I think. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Of course we all know the reason why the Balkans and Eastern Europe have gone down this route don't we?. They don't want enforced Islamic immigration by EU mandate Why is "Islamic immigration" different to any other immigration?. I think the last Islamic 'immigration" they had in that region is still ingrained in they're culture. Russian "immigration" both physically and politically a more recent and pertinent concern I think." . Russians aren't so different culturally however there's also an ingrained distrust of Russians as well. The simple matter is none of these countries want Islamic immigration, when polled it's usually in the 90% region, having it enforced on you by the EU just helps the right wing greatly which is why we see the majority of these populations "putting up" with the right wing political elements tampering with judicial practices. It's really not that different to what's going on in Turkey | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Of course we all know the reason why the Balkans and Eastern Europe have gone down this route don't we?. They don't want enforced Islamic immigration by EU mandate Why is "Islamic immigration" different to any other immigration?. I think the last Islamic 'immigration" they had in that region is still ingrained in they're culture. Russian "immigration" both physically and politically a more recent and pertinent concern I think." bollocks in your view maybe | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Of course we all know the reason why the Balkans and Eastern Europe have gone down this route don't we?. They don't want enforced Islamic immigration by EU mandate Why is "Islamic immigration" different to any other immigration?. I think the last Islamic 'immigration" they had in that region is still ingrained in they're culture. Russian "immigration" both physically and politically a more recent and pertinent concern I think.. Russians aren't so different culturally however there's also an ingrained distrust of Russians as well. The simple matter is none of these countries want Islamic immigration, when polled it's usually in the 90% region, having it enforced on you by the EU just helps the right wing greatly which is why we see the majority of these populations "putting up" with the right wing political elements tampering with judicial practices. It's really not that different to what's going on in Turkey" I don't disagree that they don't want it. I'm just saying that it's fabricated fear. None of the Eastern European countries actually have any immigration at all. They are still in the "rivers of blood" phase. The more immediate problem is Russia wanting to re-exert its influence. They are certainly doing all they can to dismantle the EU with enthusiastic support from most far right groups which they are happy to fund and Brexiteers. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Of course we all know the reason why the Balkans and Eastern Europe have gone down this route don't we?. They don't want enforced Islamic immigration by EU mandate Why is "Islamic immigration" different to any other immigration?. I think the last Islamic 'immigration" they had in that region is still ingrained in they're culture. Russian "immigration" both physically and politically a more recent and pertinent concern I think. bollocks in your view maybe" Well argued as ever  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Don't you remember your previous dire predictions about Italy collapsing last year? How did that turn out? " Eurosceptic posters on here Predicted Matteo Renzi would lose his referendum on the Italian constitution and that came to pass. Renzi fell on his sword and resigned after that defeat and his party the centre left Democrats took another beating last night in Italy. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"To be fair, the Italian economy is starting to show signs of recovery , but their economy is still a basket case. 30% youth unemployment, poor graduate employment, banks sitting on top of £170billion of toxic loans, and a public debt of 130% of GDP. What must concerns some, is the European rise of the centre right and far right politics. Is the UK the only EU country that seems to have a rise of leftist politics? It should be a concern to everyone in the world when far right Nationalist political groups start to become popular. There is an inevitability about the ultimate consequences of near neighbours become ever more Nationalistic." Seems the EU is not concerned enough to listen to the grievances these voters have all over Europe, to take action to change and reform the EU more in line with what the people want. No instead the EU ploughs on with its ever closer union mantra, more uncontrolled immigration from the 3rd world and the islamification of Europe. Brussels is just not listening. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" What must concerns some, is the European rise of the centre right and far right politics. Is the UK the only EU country that seems to have a rise of leftist politics? The government of Portugal is formed by parties from the left." Greece also elected a far left party in opposition to EU imposed austerity. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing?" Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48%. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. The fact that the Italians are voting for the party of a man who himself was disbarred from political office for corruption sadly says something about Italians. He's lied to them before, but they like the lies. The 5 Star movement is already suffering from corruption allegations. Inevitable the closer it gets to power. As ever blaming everything on the EU will not solve anything. Exactly what we are learning here. Most problems are our own." How's your ostrich impersonation coming on as you appear to be burying your head in the sand. Most problems can be traced directly back to the EU and it's policies. The rise of the far right and the far left in Europe is attributed directly to the EU and it's policies. Massive waste of taxpayers money in the EU (travelling circus of the European parliament) while people live on the breadline in Greece and have austerity imposed onto them by the EU, why do you think a far left party was elected there? Corruption in the EU. Uncontrolled immigration and open borders and the EU's complete ineptitude and inability to deal with the migrant crisis which has directly lead to the rise of far right anti immigration parties all over Europe. The EU's bureaucracy, red tape and protectionist policies stifle competition, damage economies and cost jobs as we can see with the high levels of unemployment all over southern Europe. I'd say the EU has a lot to answer for and for the culprit of many of Europe's problems the EU only has to take a look in the mirror. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% " I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Do those who voted for brexit like the thoughts of others loosing there Jobs because of voting for Brexit, see Airbus might consider moving to Europe with Job losses that's just one Business. Am glad I voted to remain at least I know it won't be us who have put them out of work. " So far those sort of claims are unfounded, the Treasury forecast upto 500,000 jobs being lost from a leave vote alone but since the vote to leave in June 2016 an additional 250,000 new jobs have been added to the UK economy. A report in today's newspapers says manufacturing firms are ignoring political uncertainty in the UK by pressing on with investment and recruitment. Almost 400 manufacturers in the report found their order books and output were "healthy" and saw a continued rise in global demand. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. The fact that the Italians are voting for the party of a man who himself was disbarred from political office for corruption sadly says something about Italians. He's lied to them before, but they like the lies. The 5 Star movement is already suffering from corruption allegations. Inevitable the closer it gets to power. As ever blaming everything on the EU will not solve anything. Exactly what we are learning here. Most problems are our own. How's your ostrich impersonation coming on as you appear to be burying your head in the sand. Most problems can be traced directly back to the EU and it's policies. The rise of the far right and the far left in Europe is attributed directly to the EU and it's policies. Massive waste of taxpayers money in the EU (travelling circus of the European parliament) while people live on the breadline in Greece and have austerity imposed onto them by the EU, why do you think a far left party was elected there? Corruption in the EU. Uncontrolled immigration and open borders and the EU's complete ineptitude and inability to deal with the migrant crisis which has directly lead to the rise of far right anti immigration parties all over Europe. The EU's bureaucracy, red tape and protectionist policies stifle competition, damage economies and cost jobs as we can see with the high levels of unemployment all over southern Europe. I'd say the EU has a lot to answer for and for the culprit of many of Europe's problems the EU only has to take a look in the mirror. " Really? No benefits whatsoever? The world-wide, I'll repeat that, WORLD-WIDE, recession in 2008 had no effect on the rise of the far right? Something happened in the USA as a consequence too. War in Syria, Libya and Iraq (started by America and supported by the UK) had no effect on immigration? Better to let them drown or send them back to war zones in your opinion? EU corruption runs at the same level as the average of EU governments. You have failed, continually, to provide an example of red tape that you want removed. There's no lack of competition within the EU, unless you can point something out. I guess you feel that the removal of all external tariffs will be good for our high wage economies. I guess we're about to find out. Isn't a bogeyman to blame all your ills on a little juvenile? Shall we blame the EU for cancer and paedophiles too? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Do those who voted for brexit like the thoughts of others loosing there Jobs because of voting for Brexit, see Airbus might consider moving to Europe with Job losses that's just one Business. Am glad I voted to remain at least I know it won't be us who have put them out of work. " For some there is no price too high to achieve their goals of a different colour passport.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up." You said... "You are an odd chap Centaur". Your words on your post earlier in the thread, so as you can see I didn't make anything up. So I'll ask you again, why do you consider it "odd" to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic when that is the majority view in this country? The 4% majority you claim is small translates into over a million votes, over a million cannot be considered small by any stretch of the imagination. Do try to Keep up.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. The fact that the Italians are voting for the party of a man who himself was disbarred from political office for corruption sadly says something about Italians. He's lied to them before, but they like the lies. The 5 Star movement is already suffering from corruption allegations. Inevitable the closer it gets to power. As ever blaming everything on the EU will not solve anything. Exactly what we are learning here. Most problems are our own. How's your ostrich impersonation coming on as you appear to be burying your head in the sand. Most problems can be traced directly back to the EU and it's policies. The rise of the far right and the far left in Europe is attributed directly to the EU and it's policies. Massive waste of taxpayers money in the EU (travelling circus of the European parliament) while people live on the breadline in Greece and have austerity imposed onto them by the EU, why do you think a far left party was elected there? Corruption in the EU. Uncontrolled immigration and open borders and the EU's complete ineptitude and inability to deal with the migrant crisis which has directly lead to the rise of far right anti immigration parties all over Europe. The EU's bureaucracy, red tape and protectionist policies stifle competition, damage economies and cost jobs as we can see with the high levels of unemployment all over southern Europe. I'd say the EU has a lot to answer for and for the culprit of many of Europe's problems the EU only has to take a look in the mirror. Really? No benefits whatsoever? The world-wide, I'll repeat that, WORLD-WIDE, recession in 2008 had no effect on the rise of the far right? Something happened in the USA as a consequence too. War in Syria, Libya and Iraq (started by America and supported by the UK) had no effect on immigration? Better to let them drown or send them back to war zones in your opinion? EU corruption runs at the same level as the average of EU governments. You have failed, continually, to provide an example of red tape that you want removed. There's no lack of competition within the EU, unless you can point something out. I guess you feel that the removal of all external tariffs will be good for our high wage economies. I guess we're about to find out. Isn't a bogeyman to blame all your ills on a little juvenile? Shall we blame the EU for cancer and paedophiles too?" By the same token you don't see or accept any wrong doing from the EU at all. The EU really can do no wrong at all in your eyes can it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Do those who voted for brexit like the thoughts of others loosing there Jobs because of voting for Brexit, see Airbus might consider moving to Europe with Job losses that's just one Business. Am glad I voted to remain at least I know it won't be us who have put them out of work. For some there is no price too high to achieve their goals of a different colour passport. "Especially when claims like the ones you quoted appear to be nothing more than scaremongering nonsense. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up. You said... "You are an odd chap Centaur". Your words on your post earlier in the thread, so as you can see I didn't make anything up. So I'll ask you again, why do you consider it "odd" to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic when that is the majority view in this country? The 4% majority you claim is small translates into over a million votes, over a million cannot be considered small by any stretch of the imagination. Do try to Keep up. "You, personally, are an odd chap. Again, the question I posed was anything that does damage to the EU seems to bring you joy. I asked directly if removing an independent judiciary and press was fine if it helped this to which...silence. Do you understand what percentages are for? Is 4% a large proportion of 100%? I'm beginning to wonder if the poor quality of maths teaching, particularly the concept of relative size and percentages has more than a little to blame for where we are right now | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up. You said... "You are an odd chap Centaur". Your words on your post earlier in the thread, so as you can see I didn't make anything up. So I'll ask you again, why do you consider it "odd" to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic when that is the majority view in this country? The 4% majority you claim is small translates into over a million votes, over a million cannot be considered small by any stretch of the imagination. Do try to Keep up.
You, personally, are an odd chap.
Again, the question I posed was anything that does damage to the EU seems to bring you joy. I asked directly if removing an independent judiciary and press was fine if it helped this to which...silence.
Do you understand what percentages are for? Is 4% a large proportion of 100%?
I'm beginning to wonder if the poor quality of maths teaching, particularly the concept of relative size and percentages has more than a little to blame for where we are right now "So in the context of the thread you're calling me odd for disliking the EU and having Eurosceptic views? I'll ask again, for the 3rd time (maybe you'd like to have a go at it this time?)....why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to have Eurosceptic views, when Euroscepticism is the majority view in this country? As for poor quality comprehension of numbers and maths maybe take a look in the mirror, if you consider over a million to be a small number. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up. You said... "You are an odd chap Centaur". Your words on your post earlier in the thread, so as you can see I didn't make anything up. So I'll ask you again, why do you consider it "odd" to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic when that is the majority view in this country? The 4% majority you claim is small translates into over a million votes, over a million cannot be considered small by any stretch of the imagination. Do try to Keep up.
You, personally, are an odd chap.
Again, the question I posed was anything that does damage to the EU seems to bring you joy. I asked directly if removing an independent judiciary and press was fine if it helped this to which...silence.
Do you understand what percentages are for? Is 4% a large proportion of 100%?
I'm beginning to wonder if the poor quality of maths teaching, particularly the concept of relative size and percentages has more than a little to blame for where we are right now
So in the context of the thread you're calling me odd for disliking the EU and having Eurosceptic views? I'll ask again, for the 3rd time (maybe you'd like to have a go at it this time?)....why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to have Eurosceptic views, when Euroscepticism is the majority view in this country?
As for poor quality comprehension of numbers and maths maybe take a look in the mirror, if you consider over a million to be a small number.
"No. Odd for viewing everything through the perspective of the EU. Anyone is allowed to be Eurosceptic. I am sceptical about a lot of it's spending and many of its policies, in the same way I am about our own government. I do not think that the removal of either Will solve all problems as you appear to. So, again, is anything that damages the EU a good thing including the removal of an impartial judiciary and press and perhaps a Parliament that may support remaining in a single market? Do you understand what a percentages are for and what they represent? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up. You said... "You are an odd chap Centaur". Your words on your post earlier in the thread, so as you can see I didn't make anything up. So I'll ask you again, why do you consider it "odd" to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic when that is the majority view in this country? The 4% majority you claim is small translates into over a million votes, over a million cannot be considered small by any stretch of the imagination. Do try to Keep up.
You, personally, are an odd chap.
Again, the question I posed was anything that does damage to the EU seems to bring you joy. I asked directly if removing an independent judiciary and press was fine if it helped this to which...silence.
Do you understand what percentages are for? Is 4% a large proportion of 100%?
I'm beginning to wonder if the poor quality of maths teaching, particularly the concept of relative size and percentages has more than a little to blame for where we are right now
So in the context of the thread you're calling me odd for disliking the EU and having Eurosceptic views? I'll ask again, for the 3rd time (maybe you'd like to have a go at it this time?)....why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to have Eurosceptic views, when Euroscepticism is the majority view in this country?
As for poor quality comprehension of numbers and maths maybe take a look in the mirror, if you consider over a million to be a small number.
No. Odd for viewing everything through the perspective of the EU.
Anyone is allowed to be Eurosceptic. I am sceptical about a lot of it's spending and many of its policies, in the same way I am about our own government. I do not think that the removal of either Will solve all problems as you appear to.
So, again, is anything that damages the EU a good thing including the removal of an impartial judiciary and press and perhaps a Parliament that may support remaining in a single market?
Do you understand what a percentages are for and what they represent?"I believe in a free press and a free Judiciary in the UK, and that's what we have (shame some far left groups don't share the same view though and seek to damage or close down newspapers like the Daily Mail). What Poland does is a matter for Poland and Polish people, frankly it's not our place (or the EU's) to interfere in their affairs. Yes I understand what percentages are for but you have to show the base numbers which give you those percentages, as I said the 4% translates into over a million votes, which is no small number. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up. You said... "You are an odd chap Centaur". Your words on your post earlier in the thread, so as you can see I didn't make anything up. So I'll ask you again, why do you consider it "odd" to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic when that is the majority view in this country? The 4% majority you claim is small translates into over a million votes, over a million cannot be considered small by any stretch of the imagination. Do try to Keep up.
You, personally, are an odd chap.
Again, the question I posed was anything that does damage to the EU seems to bring you joy. I asked directly if removing an independent judiciary and press was fine if it helped this to which...silence.
Do you understand what percentages are for? Is 4% a large proportion of 100%?
I'm beginning to wonder if the poor quality of maths teaching, particularly the concept of relative size and percentages has more than a little to blame for where we are right now
So in the context of the thread you're calling me odd for disliking the EU and having Eurosceptic views? I'll ask again, for the 3rd time (maybe you'd like to have a go at it this time?)....why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to have Eurosceptic views, when Euroscepticism is the majority view in this country?
As for poor quality comprehension of numbers and maths maybe take a look in the mirror, if you consider over a million to be a small number.
No. Odd for viewing everything through the perspective of the EU.
Anyone is allowed to be Eurosceptic. I am sceptical about a lot of it's spending and many of its policies, in the same way I am about our own government. I do not think that the removal of either Will solve all problems as you appear to.
So, again, is anything that damages the EU a good thing including the removal of an impartial judiciary and press and perhaps a Parliament that may support remaining in a single market?
Do you understand what a percentages are for and what they represent?
I believe in a free press and a free Judiciary in the UK, and that's what we have (shame some far left groups don't share the same view though and seek to damage or close down newspapers like the Daily Mail). What Poland does is a matter for Poland and Polish people, frankly it's not our place (or the EU's) to interfere in their affairs.
Yes I understand what percentages are for but you have to show the base numbers which give you those percentages, as I said the 4% translates into over a million votes, which is no small number. "So you disagree with judges being called traitors and enemies of the people then? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up. You said... "You are an odd chap Centaur". Your words on your post earlier in the thread, so as you can see I didn't make anything up. So I'll ask you again, why do you consider it "odd" to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic when that is the majority view in this country? The 4% majority you claim is small translates into over a million votes, over a million cannot be considered small by any stretch of the imagination. Do try to Keep up.
You, personally, are an odd chap.
Again, the question I posed was anything that does damage to the EU seems to bring you joy. I asked directly if removing an independent judiciary and press was fine if it helped this to which...silence.
Do you understand what percentages are for? Is 4% a large proportion of 100%?
I'm beginning to wonder if the poor quality of maths teaching, particularly the concept of relative size and percentages has more than a little to blame for where we are right now "What percentage more people voted for Brexit than voted remain? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up. You said... "You are an odd chap Centaur". Your words on your post earlier in the thread, so as you can see I didn't make anything up. So I'll ask you again, why do you consider it "odd" to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic when that is the majority view in this country? The 4% majority you claim is small translates into over a million votes, over a million cannot be considered small by any stretch of the imagination. Do try to Keep up.
You, personally, are an odd chap.
Again, the question I posed was anything that does damage to the EU seems to bring you joy. I asked directly if removing an independent judiciary and press was fine if it helped this to which...silence.
Do you understand what percentages are for? Is 4% a large proportion of 100%?
I'm beginning to wonder if the poor quality of maths teaching, particularly the concept of relative size and percentages has more than a little to blame for where we are right now
So in the context of the thread you're calling me odd for disliking the EU and having Eurosceptic views? I'll ask again, for the 3rd time (maybe you'd like to have a go at it this time?)....why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to have Eurosceptic views, when Euroscepticism is the majority view in this country?
As for poor quality comprehension of numbers and maths maybe take a look in the mirror, if you consider over a million to be a small number.
No. Odd for viewing everything through the perspective of the EU.
Anyone is allowed to be Eurosceptic. I am sceptical about a lot of it's spending and many of its policies, in the same way I am about our own government. I do not think that the removal of either Will solve all problems as you appear to.
So, again, is anything that damages the EU a good thing including the removal of an impartial judiciary and press and perhaps a Parliament that may support remaining in a single market?
Do you understand what a percentages are for and what they represent?
I believe in a free press and a free Judiciary in the UK, and that's what we have (shame some far left groups don't share the same view though and seek to damage or close down newspapers like the Daily Mail). What Poland does is a matter for Poland and Polish people, frankly it's not our place (or the EU's) to interfere in their affairs.
Yes I understand what percentages are for but you have to show the base numbers which give you those percentages, as I said the 4% translates into over a million votes, which is no small number.
So you disagree with judges being called traitors and enemies of the people then?"If you're talking about the Gina Miller court case then the ruling of the Supreme court was accepted. Parliament had a vote on article 50 like Gina Miller wanted. Do you believe in a free press and the right of a free press to print those headlines? Or do you agree with Labour Momentum who think we shouldn't have a free press and the Daily Mail should be closed down? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up. You said... "You are an odd chap Centaur". Your words on your post earlier in the thread, so as you can see I didn't make anything up. So I'll ask you again, why do you consider it "odd" to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic when that is the majority view in this country? The 4% majority you claim is small translates into over a million votes, over a million cannot be considered small by any stretch of the imagination. Do try to Keep up.
You, personally, are an odd chap.
Again, the question I posed was anything that does damage to the EU seems to bring you joy. I asked directly if removing an independent judiciary and press was fine if it helped this to which...silence.
Do you understand what percentages are for? Is 4% a large proportion of 100%?
I'm beginning to wonder if the poor quality of maths teaching, particularly the concept of relative size and percentages has more than a little to blame for where we are right now
So in the context of the thread you're calling me odd for disliking the EU and having Eurosceptic views? I'll ask again, for the 3rd time (maybe you'd like to have a go at it this time?)....why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to have Eurosceptic views, when Euroscepticism is the majority view in this country?
As for poor quality comprehension of numbers and maths maybe take a look in the mirror, if you consider over a million to be a small number.
No. Odd for viewing everything through the perspective of the EU.
Anyone is allowed to be Eurosceptic. I am sceptical about a lot of it's spending and many of its policies, in the same way I am about our own government. I do not think that the removal of either Will solve all problems as you appear to.
So, again, is anything that damages the EU a good thing including the removal of an impartial judiciary and press and perhaps a Parliament that may support remaining in a single market?
Do you understand what a percentages are for and what they represent?
I believe in a free press and a free Judiciary in the UK, and that's what we have (shame some far left groups don't share the same view though and seek to damage or close down newspapers like the Daily Mail). What Poland does is a matter for Poland and Polish people, frankly it's not our place (or the EU's) to interfere in their affairs.
Yes I understand what percentages are for but you have to show the base numbers which give you those percentages, as I said the 4% translates into over a million votes, which is no small number.
So you disagree with judges being called traitors and enemies of the people then?
If you're talking about the Gina Miller court case then the ruling of the Supreme court was accepted. Parliament had a vote on article 50 like Gina Miller wanted.
Do you believe in a free press and the right of a free press to print those headlines? Or do you agree with Labour Momentum who think we shouldn't have a free press and the Daily Mail should be closed down? "You didn't answer the question. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up. You said... "You are an odd chap Centaur". Your words on your post earlier in the thread, so as you can see I didn't make anything up. So I'll ask you again, why do you consider it "odd" to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic when that is the majority view in this country? The 4% majority you claim is small translates into over a million votes, over a million cannot be considered small by any stretch of the imagination. Do try to Keep up.
You, personally, are an odd chap.
Again, the question I posed was anything that does damage to the EU seems to bring you joy. I asked directly if removing an independent judiciary and press was fine if it helped this to which...silence.
Do you understand what percentages are for? Is 4% a large proportion of 100%?
I'm beginning to wonder if the poor quality of maths teaching, particularly the concept of relative size and percentages has more than a little to blame for where we are right now
So in the context of the thread you're calling me odd for disliking the EU and having Eurosceptic views? I'll ask again, for the 3rd time (maybe you'd like to have a go at it this time?)....why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to have Eurosceptic views, when Euroscepticism is the majority view in this country?
As for poor quality comprehension of numbers and maths maybe take a look in the mirror, if you consider over a million to be a small number.
No. Odd for viewing everything through the perspective of the EU.
Anyone is allowed to be Eurosceptic. I am sceptical about a lot of it's spending and many of its policies, in the same way I am about our own government. I do not think that the removal of either Will solve all problems as you appear to.
So, again, is anything that damages the EU a good thing including the removal of an impartial judiciary and press and perhaps a Parliament that may support remaining in a single market?
Do you understand what a percentages are for and what they represent?
I believe in a free press and a free Judiciary in the UK, and that's what we have (shame some far left groups don't share the same view though and seek to damage or close down newspapers like the Daily Mail). What Poland does is a matter for Poland and Polish people, frankly it's not our place (or the EU's) to interfere in their affairs.
Yes I understand what percentages are for but you have to show the base numbers which give you those percentages, as I said the 4% translates into over a million votes, which is no small number.
So you disagree with judges being called traitors and enemies of the people then?
If you're talking about the Gina Miller court case then the ruling of the Supreme court was accepted. Parliament had a vote on article 50 like Gina Miller wanted.
Do you believe in a free press and the right of a free press to print those headlines? Or do you agree with Labour Momentum who think we shouldn't have a free press and the Daily Mail should be closed down?
You didn't answer the question. "The Daily Mail printed those headlines you referred to. Do you believe in the right of a free press to print those headlines? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up. You said... "You are an odd chap Centaur". Your words on your post earlier in the thread, so as you can see I didn't make anything up. So I'll ask you again, why do you consider it "odd" to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic when that is the majority view in this country? The 4% majority you claim is small translates into over a million votes, over a million cannot be considered small by any stretch of the imagination. Do try to Keep up.
You, personally, are an odd chap.
Again, the question I posed was anything that does damage to the EU seems to bring you joy. I asked directly if removing an independent judiciary and press was fine if it helped this to which...silence.
Do you understand what percentages are for? Is 4% a large proportion of 100%?
I'm beginning to wonder if the poor quality of maths teaching, particularly the concept of relative size and percentages has more than a little to blame for where we are right now
So in the context of the thread you're calling me odd for disliking the EU and having Eurosceptic views? I'll ask again, for the 3rd time (maybe you'd like to have a go at it this time?)....why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to have Eurosceptic views, when Euroscepticism is the majority view in this country?
As for poor quality comprehension of numbers and maths maybe take a look in the mirror, if you consider over a million to be a small number.
No. Odd for viewing everything through the perspective of the EU.
Anyone is allowed to be Eurosceptic. I am sceptical about a lot of it's spending and many of its policies, in the same way I am about our own government. I do not think that the removal of either Will solve all problems as you appear to.
So, again, is anything that damages the EU a good thing including the removal of an impartial judiciary and press and perhaps a Parliament that may support remaining in a single market?
Do you understand what a percentages are for and what they represent?
I believe in a free press and a free Judiciary in the UK, and that's what we have (shame some far left groups don't share the same view though and seek to damage or close down newspapers like the Daily Mail). What Poland does is a matter for Poland and Polish people, frankly it's not our place (or the EU's) to interfere in their affairs.
Yes I understand what percentages are for but you have to show the base numbers which give you those percentages, as I said the 4% translates into over a million votes, which is no small number.
So you disagree with judges being called traitors and enemies of the people then?
If you're talking about the Gina Miller court case then the ruling of the Supreme court was accepted. Parliament had a vote on article 50 like Gina Miller wanted.
Do you believe in a free press and the right of a free press to print those headlines? Or do you agree with Labour Momentum who think we shouldn't have a free press and the Daily Mail should be closed down?
You didn't answer the question.
The Daily Mail printed those headlines you referred to. Do you believe in the right of a free press to print those headlines? "Yet you still refuse to answer if you agree or disagree with judges being called traitors and enemies of the people, despite previously stating you believed in a free judiciary. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up. You said... "You are an odd chap Centaur". Your words on your post earlier in the thread, so as you can see I didn't make anything up. So I'll ask you again, why do you consider it "odd" to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic when that is the majority view in this country? The 4% majority you claim is small translates into over a million votes, over a million cannot be considered small by any stretch of the imagination. Do try to Keep up.
You, personally, are an odd chap.
Again, the question I posed was anything that does damage to the EU seems to bring you joy. I asked directly if removing an independent judiciary and press was fine if it helped this to which...silence.
Do you understand what percentages are for? Is 4% a large proportion of 100%?
I'm beginning to wonder if the poor quality of maths teaching, particularly the concept of relative size and percentages has more than a little to blame for where we are right now
So in the context of the thread you're calling me odd for disliking the EU and having Eurosceptic views? I'll ask again, for the 3rd time (maybe you'd like to have a go at it this time?)....why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to have Eurosceptic views, when Euroscepticism is the majority view in this country?
As for poor quality comprehension of numbers and maths maybe take a look in the mirror, if you consider over a million to be a small number.
No. Odd for viewing everything through the perspective of the EU.
Anyone is allowed to be Eurosceptic. I am sceptical about a lot of it's spending and many of its policies, in the same way I am about our own government. I do not think that the removal of either Will solve all problems as you appear to.
So, again, is anything that damages the EU a good thing including the removal of an impartial judiciary and press and perhaps a Parliament that may support remaining in a single market?
Do you understand what a percentages are for and what they represent?
I believe in a free press and a free Judiciary in the UK, and that's what we have (shame some far left groups don't share the same view though and seek to damage or close down newspapers like the Daily Mail). What Poland does is a matter for Poland and Polish people, frankly it's not our place (or the EU's) to interfere in their affairs.
Yes I understand what percentages are for but you have to show the base numbers which give you those percentages, as I said the 4% translates into over a million votes, which is no small number.
So you disagree with judges being called traitors and enemies of the people then?
If you're talking about the Gina Miller court case then the ruling of the Supreme court was accepted. Parliament had a vote on article 50 like Gina Miller wanted.
Do you believe in a free press and the right of a free press to print those headlines? Or do you agree with Labour Momentum who think we shouldn't have a free press and the Daily Mail should be closed down?
You didn't answer the question.
The Daily Mail printed those headlines you referred to. Do you believe in the right of a free press to print those headlines?
Yet you still refuse to answer if you agree or disagree with judges being called traitors and enemies of the people, despite previously stating you believed in a free judiciary. "A free judiciary was upheld and the Supreme court ruling stood. How was the free judiciary compromised then? Yet you still refuse to answer the question,.. do you believe in a free press and the right of the free press to print those headlines? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Of course we all know the reason why the Balkans and Eastern Europe have gone down this route don't we?. They don't want enforced Islamic immigration by EU mandate Why is "Islamic immigration" different to any other immigration?. I think the last Islamic 'immigration" they had in that region is still ingrained in they're culture. Russian "immigration" both physically and politically a more recent and pertinent concern I think.. Russians aren't so different culturally however there's also an ingrained distrust of Russians as well. The simple matter is none of these countries want Islamic immigration, when polled it's usually in the 90% region, having it enforced on you by the EU just helps the right wing greatly which is why we see the majority of these populations "putting up" with the right wing political elements tampering with judicial practices. It's really not that different to what's going on in Turkey I don't disagree that they don't want it. I'm just saying that it's fabricated fear. None of the Eastern European countries actually have any immigration at all. They are still in the "rivers of blood" phase. The more immediate problem is Russia wanting to re-exert its influence. They are certainly doing all they can to dismantle the EU with enthusiastic support from most far right groups which they are happy to fund and Brexiteers." . Well yes and no, there last spell under Islam was about as productive as they're last spell under communism, cultures don't forget easily or quickly. I'm not a big believer in Russian exertion of influence, they've throughout history shown they have little to no want in it?. Do they want to be left alone is a better question, do they want to be left alone without worry of invasion is an even better question because Russia has had its fair share of invaders, it's always pointed out with Afghanistan but rarely pointed out with Russia for some reason. All cultures constantly under threat of invasion be that by legal or illegal means return to nationalism or right wing ideology. Islamic culture is different, it's political and cultural, it's not good at assimilation and it's past history is second only to communism for it's human rights abuses, it's like asking why there worried about mass communist immigration, it's blindingly obvious | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up. You said... "You are an odd chap Centaur". Your words on your post earlier in the thread, so as you can see I didn't make anything up. So I'll ask you again, why do you consider it "odd" to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic when that is the majority view in this country? The 4% majority you claim is small translates into over a million votes, over a million cannot be considered small by any stretch of the imagination. Do try to Keep up.
You, personally, are an odd chap.
Again, the question I posed was anything that does damage to the EU seems to bring you joy. I asked directly if removing an independent judiciary and press was fine if it helped this to which...silence.
Do you understand what percentages are for? Is 4% a large proportion of 100%?
I'm beginning to wonder if the poor quality of maths teaching, particularly the concept of relative size and percentages has more than a little to blame for where we are right now
So in the context of the thread you're calling me odd for disliking the EU and having Eurosceptic views? I'll ask again, for the 3rd time (maybe you'd like to have a go at it this time?)....why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to have Eurosceptic views, when Euroscepticism is the majority view in this country?
As for poor quality comprehension of numbers and maths maybe take a look in the mirror, if you consider over a million to be a small number.
No. Odd for viewing everything through the perspective of the EU.
Anyone is allowed to be Eurosceptic. I am sceptical about a lot of it's spending and many of its policies, in the same way I am about our own government. I do not think that the removal of either Will solve all problems as you appear to.
So, again, is anything that damages the EU a good thing including the removal of an impartial judiciary and press and perhaps a Parliament that may support remaining in a single market?
Do you understand what a percentages are for and what they represent?
I believe in a free press and a free Judiciary in the UK, and that's what we have (shame some far left groups don't share the same view though and seek to damage or close down newspapers like the Daily Mail). What Poland does is a matter for Poland and Polish people, frankly it's not our place (or the EU's) to interfere in their affairs.
Yes I understand what percentages are for but you have to show the base numbers which give you those percentages, as I said the 4% translates into over a million votes, which is no small number. "No, a million is a lot. But 65 million is a lot more. So it's like 1.5 percent of the whole population. So when you look at it like that it's not much. And basically that 1.7 million more who voted can be grouped into horrific racists, nationalists and those who's vote was always going to be to leave. You had 4 million guaranteed UKIP votes. So most of the aforementioned horrors were either included in that or extra to it. So as a vote it was useless as the weight was always in Leave's favour. That's why there should have been a minimum vote to carry it. So your continued posturing about the percentages is just embarrassingly pointless. You clearly don't understand the statistics. And if the vote was run again now, pretty sure it would be different. Most polls say so, because your side is fucking it up so much. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up. You said... "You are an odd chap Centaur". Your words on your post earlier in the thread, so as you can see I didn't make anything up. So I'll ask you again, why do you consider it "odd" to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic when that is the majority view in this country? The 4% majority you claim is small translates into over a million votes, over a million cannot be considered small by any stretch of the imagination. Do try to Keep up.
You, personally, are an odd chap.
Again, the question I posed was anything that does damage to the EU seems to bring you joy. I asked directly if removing an independent judiciary and press was fine if it helped this to which...silence.
Do you understand what percentages are for? Is 4% a large proportion of 100%?
I'm beginning to wonder if the poor quality of maths teaching, particularly the concept of relative size and percentages has more than a little to blame for where we are right now
So in the context of the thread you're calling me odd for disliking the EU and having Eurosceptic views? I'll ask again, for the 3rd time (maybe you'd like to have a go at it this time?)....why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to have Eurosceptic views, when Euroscepticism is the majority view in this country?
As for poor quality comprehension of numbers and maths maybe take a look in the mirror, if you consider over a million to be a small number.
No. Odd for viewing everything through the perspective of the EU.
Anyone is allowed to be Eurosceptic. I am sceptical about a lot of it's spending and many of its policies, in the same way I am about our own government. I do not think that the removal of either Will solve all problems as you appear to.
So, again, is anything that damages the EU a good thing including the removal of an impartial judiciary and press and perhaps a Parliament that may support remaining in a single market?
Do you understand what a percentages are for and what they represent?
I believe in a free press and a free Judiciary in the UK, and that's what we have (shame some far left groups don't share the same view though and seek to damage or close down newspapers like the Daily Mail). What Poland does is a matter for Poland and Polish people, frankly it's not our place (or the EU's) to interfere in their affairs.
Yes I understand what percentages are for but you have to show the base numbers which give you those percentages, as I said the 4% translates into over a million votes, which is no small number.
No, a million is a lot. But 65 million is a lot more. So it's like 1.5 percent of the whole population. So when you look at it like that it's not much.
And basically that 1.7 million more who voted can be grouped into horrific racists, nationalists and those who's vote was always going to be to leave. You had 4 million guaranteed UKIP votes. So most of the aforementioned horrors were either included in that or extra to it.
So as a vote it was useless as the weight was always in Leave's favour. That's why there should have been a minimum vote to carry it. So your continued posturing about the percentages is just embarrassingly pointless. You clearly don't understand the statistics. And if the vote was run again now, pretty sure it would be different. Most polls say so, because your side is fucking it up so much.
"Agree with the stats, but not with the analysis. Remain was seen as a foregone conclusion by a complacent bourgeoisie who thought that the proles would vote how they were told, but they didn't. Plenty of non-racists voted leave. Leave is, in fact the only Socialist option as no renationalising can take place whilst we are in the EU. Remain voters are centre right, where as leave voters range across the political spectrum. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up. You said... "You are an odd chap Centaur". Your words on your post earlier in the thread, so as you can see I didn't make anything up. So I'll ask you again, why do you consider it "odd" to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic when that is the majority view in this country? The 4% majority you claim is small translates into over a million votes, over a million cannot be considered small by any stretch of the imagination. Do try to Keep up.
You, personally, are an odd chap.
Again, the question I posed was anything that does damage to the EU seems to bring you joy. I asked directly if removing an independent judiciary and press was fine if it helped this to which...silence.
Do you understand what percentages are for? Is 4% a large proportion of 100%?
I'm beginning to wonder if the poor quality of maths teaching, particularly the concept of relative size and percentages has more than a little to blame for where we are right now
So in the context of the thread you're calling me odd for disliking the EU and having Eurosceptic views? I'll ask again, for the 3rd time (maybe you'd like to have a go at it this time?)....why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to have Eurosceptic views, when Euroscepticism is the majority view in this country?
As for poor quality comprehension of numbers and maths maybe take a look in the mirror, if you consider over a million to be a small number.
No. Odd for viewing everything through the perspective of the EU.
Anyone is allowed to be Eurosceptic. I am sceptical about a lot of it's spending and many of its policies, in the same way I am about our own government. I do not think that the removal of either Will solve all problems as you appear to.
So, again, is anything that damages the EU a good thing including the removal of an impartial judiciary and press and perhaps a Parliament that may support remaining in a single market?
Do you understand what a percentages are for and what they represent?
I believe in a free press and a free Judiciary in the UK, and that's what we have (shame some far left groups don't share the same view though and seek to damage or close down newspapers like the Daily Mail). What Poland does is a matter for Poland and Polish people, frankly it's not our place (or the EU's) to interfere in their affairs.
Yes I understand what percentages are for but you have to show the base numbers which give you those percentages, as I said the 4% translates into over a million votes, which is no small number.
No, a million is a lot. But 65 million is a lot more. So it's like 1.5 percent of the whole population. So when you look at it like that it's not much.
And basically that 1.7 million more who voted can be grouped into horrific racists, nationalists and those who's vote was always going to be to leave. You had 4 million guaranteed UKIP votes. So most of the aforementioned horrors were either included in that or extra to it.
So as a vote it was useless as the weight was always in Leave's favour. That's why there should have been a minimum vote to carry it. So your continued posturing about the percentages is just embarrassingly pointless. You clearly don't understand the statistics. And if the vote was run again now, pretty sure it would be different. Most polls say so, because your side is fucking it up so much.
Agree with the stats, but not with the analysis.
Remain was seen as a foregone conclusion by a complacent bourgeoisie who thought that the proles would vote how they were told, but they didn't.
Plenty of non-racists voted leave.
Leave is, in fact the only Socialist option as no renationalising can take place whilst we are in the EU.
Remain voters are centre right, where as leave voters range across the political spectrum. "I voted leave, im not racist, I love most people | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up. You said... "You are an odd chap Centaur". Your words on your post earlier in the thread, so as you can see I didn't make anything up. So I'll ask you again, why do you consider it "odd" to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic when that is the majority view in this country? The 4% majority you claim is small translates into over a million votes, over a million cannot be considered small by any stretch of the imagination. Do try to Keep up.
You, personally, are an odd chap.
Again, the question I posed was anything that does damage to the EU seems to bring you joy. I asked directly if removing an independent judiciary and press was fine if it helped this to which...silence.
Do you understand what percentages are for? Is 4% a large proportion of 100%?
I'm beginning to wonder if the poor quality of maths teaching, particularly the concept of relative size and percentages has more than a little to blame for where we are right now
So in the context of the thread you're calling me odd for disliking the EU and having Eurosceptic views? I'll ask again, for the 3rd time (maybe you'd like to have a go at it this time?)....why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to have Eurosceptic views, when Euroscepticism is the majority view in this country?
As for poor quality comprehension of numbers and maths maybe take a look in the mirror, if you consider over a million to be a small number.
No. Odd for viewing everything through the perspective of the EU.
Anyone is allowed to be Eurosceptic. I am sceptical about a lot of it's spending and many of its policies, in the same way I am about our own government. I do not think that the removal of either Will solve all problems as you appear to.
So, again, is anything that damages the EU a good thing including the removal of an impartial judiciary and press and perhaps a Parliament that may support remaining in a single market?
Do you understand what a percentages are for and what they represent?
I believe in a free press and a free Judiciary in the UK, and that's what we have (shame some far left groups don't share the same view though and seek to damage or close down newspapers like the Daily Mail). What Poland does is a matter for Poland and Polish people, frankly it's not our place (or the EU's) to interfere in their affairs.
Yes I understand what percentages are for but you have to show the base numbers which give you those percentages, as I said the 4% translates into over a million votes, which is no small number.
No, a million is a lot. But 65 million is a lot more. So it's like 1.5 percent of the whole population. So when you look at it like that it's not much.
And basically that 1.7 million more who voted can be grouped into horrific racists, nationalists and those who's vote was always going to be to leave. You had 4 million guaranteed UKIP votes. So most of the aforementioned horrors were either included in that or extra to it.
So as a vote it was useless as the weight was always in Leave's favour. That's why there should have been a minimum vote to carry it. So your continued posturing about the percentages is just embarrassingly pointless. You clearly don't understand the statistics. And if the vote was run again now, pretty sure it would be different. Most polls say so, because your side is fucking it up so much.
"So you think 65 Million should have been allowed to vote then? The Tony Blair Institute for Global Change recently carried out a Brexit poll....The Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, a more remain leaning organisation would probably be impossible to find. The question on their poll was simple... Given the choice would you a) Leave the EU at any cost, or b) stop the process, and think again. 174,000 people voted, arguably the biggest poll response by far, 66% answered a), 34% answered b) They shut the poll down before it was due to end. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up. You said... "You are an odd chap Centaur". Your words on your post earlier in the thread, so as you can see I didn't make anything up. So I'll ask you again, why do you consider it "odd" to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic when that is the majority view in this country? The 4% majority you claim is small translates into over a million votes, over a million cannot be considered small by any stretch of the imagination. Do try to Keep up.
You, personally, are an odd chap.
Again, the question I posed was anything that does damage to the EU seems to bring you joy. I asked directly if removing an independent judiciary and press was fine if it helped this to which...silence.
Do you understand what percentages are for? Is 4% a large proportion of 100%?
I'm beginning to wonder if the poor quality of maths teaching, particularly the concept of relative size and percentages has more than a little to blame for where we are right now
So in the context of the thread you're calling me odd for disliking the EU and having Eurosceptic views? I'll ask again, for the 3rd time (maybe you'd like to have a go at it this time?)....why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to have Eurosceptic views, when Euroscepticism is the majority view in this country?
As for poor quality comprehension of numbers and maths maybe take a look in the mirror, if you consider over a million to be a small number.
No. Odd for viewing everything through the perspective of the EU.
Anyone is allowed to be Eurosceptic. I am sceptical about a lot of it's spending and many of its policies, in the same way I am about our own government. I do not think that the removal of either Will solve all problems as you appear to.
So, again, is anything that damages the EU a good thing including the removal of an impartial judiciary and press and perhaps a Parliament that may support remaining in a single market?
Do you understand what a percentages are for and what they represent?
I believe in a free press and a free Judiciary in the UK, and that's what we have (shame some far left groups don't share the same view though and seek to damage or close down newspapers like the Daily Mail). What Poland does is a matter for Poland and Polish people, frankly it's not our place (or the EU's) to interfere in their affairs.
Yes I understand what percentages are for but you have to show the base numbers which give you those percentages, as I said the 4% translates into over a million votes, which is no small number.
No, a million is a lot. But 65 million is a lot more. So it's like 1.5 percent of the whole population. So when you look at it like that it's not much.
And basically that 1.7 million more who voted can be grouped into horrific racists, nationalists and those who's vote was always going to be to leave. You had 4 million guaranteed UKIP votes. So most of the aforementioned horrors were either included in that or extra to it.
So as a vote it was useless as the weight was always in Leave's favour. That's why there should have been a minimum vote to carry it. So your continued posturing about the percentages is just embarrassingly pointless. You clearly don't understand the statistics. And if the vote was run again now, pretty sure it would be different. Most polls say so, because your side is fucking it up so much.
Agree with the stats, but not with the analysis.
Remain was seen as a foregone conclusion by a complacent bourgeoisie who thought that the proles would vote how they were told, but they didn't.
Plenty of non-racists voted leave.
Leave is, in fact the only Socialist option as no renationalising can take place whilst we are in the EU.
Remain voters are centre right, where as leave voters range across the political spectrum.
I voted leave, im not racist, I love most people "I didn't say everyone who voted leave was racist. I said that Leave as a movement already had 4 million votes in the bag. Guaranteed. From UKIP voters. All the rest were open to debate perhaps, or a least easily taken in by the lies. So if you are starting any vote like that with an automatic bias, then the result should allow for correction. Of that 4 million, there were a lot of EDL, Britain First style people. The racist/nationalists. Their Facebook pages, and various other nationalist ones were all urging members to vote UKIP and Leave. No matter how hard you fight it, the racists won it for leave. As if you believe that a lot of people were swung by powerful argument towards the leave camp (ROFL!), without the racist vote you'd have still been short a couple million. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up. You said... "You are an odd chap Centaur". Your words on your post earlier in the thread, so as you can see I didn't make anything up. So I'll ask you again, why do you consider it "odd" to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic when that is the majority view in this country? The 4% majority you claim is small translates into over a million votes, over a million cannot be considered small by any stretch of the imagination. Do try to Keep up.
You, personally, are an odd chap.
Again, the question I posed was anything that does damage to the EU seems to bring you joy. I asked directly if removing an independent judiciary and press was fine if it helped this to which...silence.
Do you understand what percentages are for? Is 4% a large proportion of 100%?
I'm beginning to wonder if the poor quality of maths teaching, particularly the concept of relative size and percentages has more than a little to blame for where we are right now
So in the context of the thread you're calling me odd for disliking the EU and having Eurosceptic views? I'll ask again, for the 3rd time (maybe you'd like to have a go at it this time?)....why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to have Eurosceptic views, when Euroscepticism is the majority view in this country?
As for poor quality comprehension of numbers and maths maybe take a look in the mirror, if you consider over a million to be a small number.
No. Odd for viewing everything through the perspective of the EU.
Anyone is allowed to be Eurosceptic. I am sceptical about a lot of it's spending and many of its policies, in the same way I am about our own government. I do not think that the removal of either Will solve all problems as you appear to.
So, again, is anything that damages the EU a good thing including the removal of an impartial judiciary and press and perhaps a Parliament that may support remaining in a single market?
Do you understand what a percentages are for and what they represent?
I believe in a free press and a free Judiciary in the UK, and that's what we have (shame some far left groups don't share the same view though and seek to damage or close down newspapers like the Daily Mail). What Poland does is a matter for Poland and Polish people, frankly it's not our place (or the EU's) to interfere in their affairs.
Yes I understand what percentages are for but you have to show the base numbers which give you those percentages, as I said the 4% translates into over a million votes, which is no small number.
No, a million is a lot. But 65 million is a lot more. So it's like 1.5 percent of the whole population. So when you look at it like that it's not much.
And basically that 1.7 million more who voted can be grouped into horrific racists, nationalists and those who's vote was always going to be to leave. You had 4 million guaranteed UKIP votes. So most of the aforementioned horrors were either included in that or extra to it.
So as a vote it was useless as the weight was always in Leave's favour. That's why there should have been a minimum vote to carry it. So your continued posturing about the percentages is just embarrassingly pointless. You clearly don't understand the statistics. And if the vote was run again now, pretty sure it would be different. Most polls say so, because your side is fucking it up so much.
Agree with the stats, but not with the analysis.
Remain was seen as a foregone conclusion by a complacent bourgeoisie who thought that the proles would vote how they were told, but they didn't.
Plenty of non-racists voted leave.
Leave is, in fact the only Socialist option as no renationalising can take place whilst we are in the EU.
Remain voters are centre right, where as leave voters range across the political spectrum.
I voted leave, im not racist, I love most people
I didn't say everyone who voted leave was racist. I said that Leave as a movement already had 4 million votes in the bag. Guaranteed. From UKIP voters. All the rest were open to debate perhaps, or a least easily taken in by the lies. So if you are starting any vote like that with an automatic bias, then the result should allow for correction.
Of that 4 million, there were a lot of EDL, Britain First style people. The racist/nationalists. Their Facebook pages, and various other nationalist ones were all urging members to vote UKIP and Leave.
No matter how hard you fight it, the racists won it for leave. As if you believe that a lot of people were swung by powerful argument towards the leave camp (ROFL!), without the racist vote you'd have still been short a couple million. "Actually the mostly labour voting proles fucked it up for Remain. The EDL and BF make up a tiny minority of the public. But then, your attitude is typical of condescending bourgoise liberals who still believe in the "third way" and simply refuse to believe that the unwashed masses could have an opinion that differs from yours wholesale. I'm sure like Tony Blair you are willing to fight to see democracy overturned and impose your global capitalist ideology on the people whether they like it or not. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Actually the mostly labour voting proles fucked it up for Remain. The EDL and BF make up a tiny minority of the public. But then, your attitude is typical of condescending bourgoise liberals who still believe in the "third way" and simply refuse to believe that the unwashed masses could have an opinion that differs from yours wholesale. I'm sure like Tony Blair you are willing to fight to see democracy overturned and impose your global capitalist ideology on the people whether they like it or not. " Making assumptions about me much? Allow me to condescend in a bourgeois fashion and say that anyone with a modicum of education should be voting for Corbyn. Don't you? Silly prole. And then point out that's all bollocks, I'm a green party member if you must know. Only interested in a third way if it destroys 2 party politics. And there's actually more right wing extremists than you think. Wether they turn up to marches or not. And in that grouping was also the older people. The racist nans and grandpas. My in-laws are horrific in that regard. So they are out there, and there's a lot of them. Yes the remain campaign was atrocious. But it assumed a starting point of guaranteed voters that were never there. Unlike the Leave camp. So again. If the system started with an automatic bias, the result should have been corrected, or advisory! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This is why I left the green party after 20 years of membership "What, the racist nans or the fact that they allow trannies to join? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Actually the mostly labour voting proles fucked it up for Remain. The EDL and BF make up a tiny minority of the public. But then, your attitude is typical of condescending bourgoise liberals who still believe in the "third way" and simply refuse to believe that the unwashed masses could have an opinion that differs from yours wholesale. I'm sure like Tony Blair you are willing to fight to see democracy overturned and impose your global capitalist ideology on the people whether they like it or not. Making assumptions about me much? Allow me to condescend in a bourgeois fashion and say that anyone with a modicum of education should be voting for Corbyn. Don't you? Silly prole. And then point out that's all bollocks, I'm a green party member if you must know. Only interested in a third way if it destroys 2 party politics. And there's actually more right wing extremists than you think. Wether they turn up to marches or not. And in that grouping was also the older people. The racist nans and grandpas. My in-laws are horrific in that regard. So they are out there, and there's a lot of them. Yes the remain campaign was atrocious. But it assumed a starting point of guaranteed voters that were never there. Unlike the Leave camp. So again. If the system started with an automatic bias, the result should have been corrected, or advisory! " So you think all UKIP voters are racists, anyone 50 or over is racist, all 65 Million in the UK should have a vote, and Jeremy Corbyn's initials are JC because he's the messiah. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This is why I left the green party after 20 years of membership
What, the racist nans or the fact that they allow trannies to join? ". No the fact that they pay more attention to placating a very very minor amount of people concerned about bollocks that nobody else gives a fuck over  .
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This is why I left the green party after 20 years of membership
What, the racist nans or the fact that they allow trannies to join? .
No the fact that they pay more attention to placating a very very minor amount of people concerned about bollocks that nobody else gives a fuck over .
" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This is why I left the green party after 20 years of membership
What, the racist nans or the fact that they allow trannies to join? .
No the fact that they pay more attention to placating a very very minor amount of people concerned about bollocks that nobody else gives a fuck over .
"So, trannies then. Why not just say so. Don't worry, already know the answer to that. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This is why I left the green party after 20 years of membership
What, the racist nans or the fact that they allow trannies to join? .
No the fact that they pay more attention to placating a very very minor amount of people concerned about bollocks that nobody else gives a fuck over .
So, trannies then. Why not just say so.
Don't worry, already know the answer to that. ". so your for Racist granny trannies then? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italy went to the polls today in their government elections. Exit polls suggest the anti establishment and Eurosceptic 5 star movement has gained the highest percentage of the vote around 38%. The centre right Forza party lead by Silvio Berlusconi on around 15% and the far right Eurosceptic League party also on 15%. The mainstream centre left party currently in government going down significantly to around 20-25%. So if the exit polls turn out to be correct could be potentially looking at a coalition of centre right/far right Eurosceptic parties in Italy. There will be some glum faces at EU headquarters in Brussels tonight, no doubt Jean Claude Juncker will be raiding his cognac cupboard to drown his sorrows again. You are an odd chap Centaur. Does literally any event that may prove negative to the EU good for you? Poland has completely replaced its judiciary against EU political appointees. This means that they can enforce whatever law they wish without an independent judiciary to object. This includes shutting down the independent press. This is against EU law. Do you think it's a good thing? Why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic? In case you forgot 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU in the UK, that puts me in the 52% majority. Maybe it's your Europhile views that are considered odd in this country as you're in the minority 48% I didn't say that anything was odd. Do you now just make up words and reply to them? 4% is a small majority. How do you define small? I was asking you if not having an independent judiciary or press was a good thing if it is a step closer to the destruction of the EU. Keep up. You said... "You are an odd chap Centaur". Your words on your post earlier in the thread, so as you can see I didn't make anything up. So I'll ask you again, why do you consider it "odd" to dislike the EU and to be Eurosceptic when that is the majority view in this country? The 4% majority you claim is small translates into over a million votes, over a million cannot be considered small by any stretch of the imagination. Do try to Keep up.
You, personally, are an odd chap.
Again, the question I posed was anything that does damage to the EU seems to bring you joy. I asked directly if removing an independent judiciary and press was fine if it helped this to which...silence.
Do you understand what percentages are for? Is 4% a large proportion of 100%?
I'm beginning to wonder if the poor quality of maths teaching, particularly the concept of relative size and percentages has more than a little to blame for where we are right now
So in the context of the thread you're calling me odd for disliking the EU and having Eurosceptic views? I'll ask again, for the 3rd time (maybe you'd like to have a go at it this time?)....why do you consider it odd to dislike the EU and to have Eurosceptic views, when Euroscepticism is the majority view in this country?
As for poor quality comprehension of numbers and maths maybe take a look in the mirror, if you consider over a million to be a small number.
No. Odd for viewing everything through the perspective of the EU.
Anyone is allowed to be Eurosceptic. I am sceptical about a lot of it's spending and many of its policies, in the same way I am about our own government. I do not think that the removal of either Will solve all problems as you appear to.
So, again, is anything that damages the EU a good thing including the removal of an impartial judiciary and press and perhaps a Parliament that may support remaining in a single market?
Do you understand what a percentages are for and what they represent?
I believe in a free press and a free Judiciary in the UK, and that's what we have (shame some far left groups don't share the same view though and seek to damage or close down newspapers like the Daily Mail). What Poland does is a matter for Poland and Polish people, frankly it's not our place (or the EU's) to interfere in their affairs.
Yes I understand what percentages are for but you have to show the base numbers which give you those percentages, as I said the 4% translates into over a million votes, which is no small number.
No, a million is a lot. But 65 million is a lot more. So it's like 1.5 percent of the whole population. So when you look at it like that it's not much.
And basically that 1.7 million more who voted can be grouped into horrific racists, nationalists and those who's vote was always going to be to leave. You had 4 million guaranteed UKIP votes. So most of the aforementioned horrors were either included in that or extra to it.
So as a vote it was useless as the weight was always in Leave's favour. That's why there should have been a minimum vote to carry it. So your continued posturing about the percentages is just embarrassingly pointless. You clearly don't understand the statistics. And if the vote was run again now, pretty sure it would be different. Most polls say so, because your side is fucking it up so much.
Agree with the stats, but not with the analysis.
Remain was seen as a foregone conclusion by a complacent bourgeoisie who thought that the proles would vote how they were told, but they didn't.
Plenty of non-racists voted leave.
Leave is, in fact the only Socialist option as no renationalising can take place whilst we are in the EU.
Remain voters are centre right, where as leave voters range across the political spectrum. "Actually it's not true that the EU does not allow nationalisation of industries. It's another BREXIT myth. Germany, France, Spain and other EU countries have nationalised utility companies and nationalised companies in other areas - In fact many of these European nationalised companies own our utilities! EU law explicitly protects the right of member states to nationalise industries. Art. 345 of the Treaties Of the EU states “The Treaties shall in no way prejudice the rules in Member States governing the system of property ownership.” Art. 345 remains in the treaty. It is possible to generally promote liberal markets and operate some industries as national monopolies. The EU is tolerant of member states accused of violating the treaties if their actions are “proportionate“, i.e. for a legitimate aim (which would include one endorsed by the electorate) and effective, but not excessive, in achieving that aim. Assuming that nationalisation was prominent in Mr Corbyn’s manifesto, conducted on a transparent timetable and proper compensation was paid, Mr Corbyn would have a strong case based on Art. 345. But even without Art. 345 EU law would not prohibit the Corbyn plan. No EU provisions ban nationalised industries. Some do regulate how they can behave in relation to other enterprises. In essence, enterprises with a dominant position in the market due to state action cannot use that position to behave unreasonably. The EU will not intervene unless the nationalisation or the way it is implemented is unreasonable or, after nationalisation, the organisation acts in an unreasonable manner. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This is why I left the green party after 20 years of membership
What, the racist nans or the fact that they allow trannies to join? .
No the fact that they pay more attention to placating a very very minor amount of people concerned about bollocks that nobody else gives a fuck over .
"So who do you vote for dave.? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This is why I left the green party after 20 years of membership
What, the racist nans or the fact that they allow trannies to join? .
No the fact that they pay more attention to placating a very very minor amount of people concerned about bollocks that nobody else gives a fuck over .
So who do you vote for dave.?
". Nobody, I've given up on politics, it's a load of bollocks that causes more problems than it cures... There's always going to be a little bit of a Leninist in me, I used to think it's because I hated the rich and the corporations but I've realised I'm just grumpy and hate most things, tearing down things seemed like a good idea when I was younger because I thought we were destroying the planet, now I know we're destroying the planet and I'm keen on keeping what we've got!. Life's bizarre | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This is why I left the green party after 20 years of membership
What, the racist nans or the fact that they allow trannies to join? .
No the fact that they pay more attention to placating a very very minor amount of people concerned about bollocks that nobody else gives a fuck over .
So who do you vote for dave.?
.
Nobody, I've given up on politics, it's a load of bollocks that causes more problems than it cures... There's always going to be a little bit of a Leninist in me, I used to think it's because I hated the rich and the corporations but I've realised I'm just grumpy and hate most things, tearing down things seemed like a good idea when I was younger because I thought we were destroying the planet, now I know we're destroying the planet and I'm keen on keeping what we've got!.
Life's bizarre "But your in the politics forum dave. You've not given up on people then dave ? Or the planet.? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
A politics forum
You do make me chuckle bobster | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"
A politics forum
You do make me chuckle bobster " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
...an interesting thing: italians abroad voted the dem party.
I'd go further and bet that almost every italian that speak actively another major language voted dem.
I'm italian but totally against this anti-establishment party. Degrowth may work in Sweden and Norway, not here. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"hello again fabs
...an interesting thing: italians abroad voted the dem party.
I'd go further and bet that almost every italian that speak actively another major language voted dem.
I'm italian but totally against this anti-establishment party. Degrowth may work in Sweden and Norway, not here."Apparently 57% of 18-24 year olds voted for anti-EU parties. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Strange really, because in the EU referendum, it was the 'older voters' who have screwed up the youth's futures, younger voters know best, and are more intelligent.it's even been suggested that people over 65 shouldn't be allowed to vote. Yet it seems to be the opposite in Italy! " Maybe with youth unemployment at over 30%, and graduate unemployment at 60%, they feel that the EU isn't working for them? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Strange really, because in the EU referendum, it was the 'older voters' who have screwed up the youth's futures, younger voters know best, and are more intelligent.it's even been suggested that people over 65 shouldn't be allowed to vote. Yet it seems to be the opposite in Italy! " And you are basing this on a statistical sample size of 1 are you? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Strange really, because in the EU referendum, it was the 'older voters' who have screwed up the youth's futures, younger voters know best, and are more intelligent.it's even been suggested that people over 65 shouldn't be allowed to vote. Yet it seems to be the opposite in Italy! And you are basing this on a statistical sample size of 1 are you? " I thought he was basing it on the '57% of 18-24 yr olds' quoted in an earlier post. On the subject of basing something on a statistical sample size of 1, didn't you do exactly that on another thread recently? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"as I said, Italian isn't exactly mutually intelligible with many languages (maybe french? but I'm biased becaus ewe speak languages that are close to french), not even spanish, let alone portuguese. Information is badly gathered and, often, badly or summarily translated. Feed those slightly altered informations to political-active people that can't understand a slightly complex sentence (that 3 years ago were selling soda at the stadium for a living) and there you go: flat earthers, hamerians, no-vax and similar people suddenly got more than just a chance to impose their twisted beliefs. that's what we have to deal with in Italy." Hamerians ? That's new . The rest i've come across.Well not literally. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"as I said, Italian isn't exactly mutually intelligible with many languages (maybe french? but I'm biased becaus ewe speak languages that are close to french), not even spanish, let alone portuguese. Information is badly gathered and, often, badly or summarily translated. Feed those slightly altered informations to political-active people that can't understand a slightly complex sentence (that 3 years ago were selling soda at the stadium for a living) and there you go: flat earthers, hamerians, no-vax and similar people suddenly got more than just a chance to impose their twisted beliefs. that's what we have to deal with in Italy." . And this is the best you can come up with for why Italians are dropping the main stream political parties run by comedians and right wing extremists?. Jesus Christ, you know that in Italian translates to what the fuck | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"as I said, Italian isn't exactly mutually intelligible with many languages (maybe french? but I'm biased becaus ewe speak languages that are close to french), not even spanish, let alone portuguese. Information is badly gathered and, often, badly or summarily translated. Feed those slightly altered informations to political-active people that can't understand a slightly complex sentence (that 3 years ago were selling soda at the stadium for a living) and there you go: flat earthers, hamerians, no-vax and similar people suddenly got more than just a chance to impose their twisted beliefs. that's what we have to deal with in Italy.. And this is the best you can come up with for why Italians are dropping the main stream political parties run by comedians and right wing extremists?. Jesus Christ, you know that in Italian translates to what the fuck "Bob you do realise 60%voted for right wing parties dont you? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"as I said, Italian isn't exactly mutually intelligible with many languages (maybe french? but I'm biased becaus ewe speak languages that are close to french), not even spanish, let alone portuguese. Information is badly gathered and, often, badly or summarily translated. Feed those slightly altered informations to political-active people that can't understand a slightly complex sentence (that 3 years ago were selling soda at the stadium for a living) and there you go: flat earthers, hamerians, no-vax and similar people suddenly got more than just a chance to impose their twisted beliefs. that's what we have to deal with in Italy.. And this is the best you can come up with for why Italians are dropping the main stream political parties run by comedians and right wing extremists?. Jesus Christ, you know that in Italian translates to what the fuck
Bob you do realise 60%voted for right wing parties dont you?
". I'm Dave, he's Bob and yes I do realise why 60% voted for right wingers and comedians. There fucked off | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Italians usually vote for the biggest tits. Which i suppose is the same as voting for the far right and comedians . "Yes the former Europhile Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi was a huge tit. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Isn’t it astonishing that there are people in this country who get excited at the thought of right wing Nationalist parties getting more and more support in various European countries. I mean, what could possibly go wrong with lots of neighbouring countries getting all Nationalistic again?" History repeats itself unfortunately but on the upside they lose everytime they raise their flags.The pendulum is swinging back towards the far right extremists.The good and decent people will be ready.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Isn’t it astonishing that there are people in this country who get excited at the thought of right wing Nationalist parties getting more and more support in various European countries. I mean, what could possibly go wrong with lots of neighbouring countries getting all Nationalistic again?" I think "astonishing" is possibly the wrong choice of words. Mussolini was seen as quite an inspirational figure in parts of the British press/population at the time, as was Moseley and Hitler (albeit slightly shorter lived in Adolf's case). The problem is that these people are not now calling themselves Fascists and marching up and down in uniform beating up "undesirables" (yet) and some people are apparently taken in by this. Part of the problem in Europe is the total annihilation of the left, which for the most part, refused to let go of "third way" politics. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Isn’t it astonishing that there are people in this country who get excited at the thought of right wing Nationalist parties getting more and more support in various European countries. I mean, what could possibly go wrong with lots of neighbouring countries getting all Nationalistic again?" . The only thing I find astonishing is that you find this astonishing!!. You stick an electric probe up a Monkeys arse and you can get it to do pretty much anything. They've had reporters beaten up live on air, mass gang r@pes, stabbings, murders, no go zones all over Rome, running riots through major cities, child r@pes and yes they had all this stuff already but and the centre political parties have done nothing to stem this influx of migrants that not one single EU country wants when polled and in some twisted form of sticking the knife in the voters back not only have they done nothing about it but they flatly refuse to even acknowledge the problem and even say we need more of it because you lot are an ageing society. Well blow me down if they aren't all starting to vote the loonies in | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Isn’t it astonishing that there are people in this country who get excited at the thought of right wing Nationalist parties getting more and more support in various European countries. I mean, what could possibly go wrong with lots of neighbouring countries getting all Nationalistic again?. The only thing I find astonishing is that you find this astonishing!!. You stick an electric probe up a Monkeys arse and you can get it to do pretty much anything. They've had reporters beaten up live on air, mass gang r@pes, stabbings, murders, no go zones all over Rome, running riots through major cities, child r@pes and yes they had all this stuff already but and the centre political parties have done nothing to stem this influx of migrants that not one single EU country wants when polled and in some twisted form of sticking the knife in the voters back not only have they done nothing about it but they flatly refuse to even acknowledge the problem and even say we need more of it because you lot are an ageing society. Well blow me down if they aren't all starting to vote the loonies in "Yes Italy's ageing society with over 30% youth unemployment needs young migrants. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A couple of things here. One I find shocking even from supporters of Brexit. Direct question. Is the rise of extreme right wing parties a good thing anywhere? Is the destruction of the EU such a great goal that anything to reach that end is acceptable? Secondly, how much do any of you understand about Italian politics? Guess what. It's complicated. The ground swell of the vote, particularly the youth vote, is anti corruption. Not EU corruption, but the generations of corruption embedded in how the Italian state functions. Nepotism and criminal. The 5star voter base is strongly left wing. Eurosceptic, but not with a policy to leave. A coalition is not likely to form with the most right wing parties. All of the parties that have made the biggest gains have followed the trend of making promises for which the consequences are mind boggling. Reducing the pension age, universal basic income. Remember that any Brexit agreement requires every member state to agree. With italy on chaos, that screws us. Yay "The 5 Star movement is Eurosceptic and got the highest share of the vote. The 2nd place party on 17% share of the vote was the League (who are right wing) and they are also Eurosceptic and want to leave the Euro! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A couple of things here. One I find shocking even from supporters of Brexit. Direct question. Is the rise of extreme right wing parties a good thing anywhere? Is the destruction of the EU such a great goal that anything to reach that end is acceptable? Secondly, how much do any of you understand about Italian politics? Guess what. It's complicated. The ground swell of the vote, particularly the youth vote, is anti corruption. Not EU corruption, but the generations of corruption embedded in how the Italian state functions. Nepotism and criminal. The 5star voter base is strongly left wing. Eurosceptic, but not with a policy to leave. A coalition is not likely to form with the most right wing parties. All of the parties that have made the biggest gains have followed the trend of making promises for which the consequences are mind boggling. Reducing the pension age, universal basic income. Remember that any Brexit agreement requires every member state to agree. With italy on chaos, that screws us. Yay
The 5 Star movement is Eurosceptic and got the highest share of the vote. The 2nd place party on 17% share of the vote was the League (who are right wing) and they are also Eurosceptic and want to leave the Euro! "I am Eurosceptic. I think that the EU does a lot of things badly and could improve others. That doesn't that I think that tearing it down or leaving it is a good idea. The 5 Star movement does not want to leave the Euro so it will therefore rain in the EU but perhaps be less compliant. What indication do you have that 5 Star will form a government with the Northern League? Will they leave the Euro if they do? Would ultra right wing governments in multiple European countries be a good thing if it meant the end.of the EU? What cost is acceptable to you for that outcome? No free press? No independent judiciary? Being able to employ people.based on religion? Skin colour? Sex? What's your line? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. " How many migrants do you think the UK should take? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. " Can I suggest you read a book called "adults in the room" -it's a big book with in depth facts but once you have read it you will be enlightened! Conclusion: Been there before - Greece. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? " No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. " I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? " One more than Hungary.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary. "I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999? "The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. Can I suggest you read a book called "adults in the room" -it's a big book with in depth facts but once you have read it you will be enlightened! Conclusion: Been there before - Greece." Not the same as Greece at all, Italy is a different country with a much more Eurosceptic government now. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any. "But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. Can I suggest you read a book called "adults in the room" -it's a big book with in depth facts but once you have read it you will be enlightened! Conclusion: Been there before - Greece. Not the same as Greece at all, Italy is a different country with a much more Eurosceptic government now. " There speaks the words of the political forum expert I do have to laugh ha ha | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?"There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy. "Here we go again at least you have called them the right names this time | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy. "There is, it's called the transition period. Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Yes methinks Herr Juncker will be swilling down a handful of Paracetamol with his brandy this morning.
"an Italian minister on the daily politics show today said that every time junkets opened his mouth more people went to the anti eu parties. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?"No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants. The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help. Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats. They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia. And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive. Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
"So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post. Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Centaur is right. The EU should take them - specifically the European Parliament. They should all live there. Juncker, Barnier, Verhofstadt can all work amongst them, pay for them and take them all home at night. Maybe then they will realise that mass fake, economic immigration is not so great after all!" And which country is that in? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Centaur is right. The EU should take them - specifically the European Parliament. They should all live there. Juncker, Barnier, Verhofstadt can all work amongst them, pay for them and take them all home at night. Maybe then they will realise that mass fake, economic immigration is not so great after all! And which country is that in? " It doesn't matter. They won't be allowed out. They will always be at the European Parliament, the European Commission or at the houses of Juncker and Co. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Centaur is right. The EU should take them - specifically the European Parliament. They should all live there. Juncker, Barnier, Verhofstadt can all work amongst them, pay for them and take them all home at night. Maybe then they will realise that mass fake, economic immigration is not so great after all! And which country is that in? It doesn't matter. They won't be allowed out. They will always be at the European Parliament, the European Commission or at the houses of Juncker and Co." So your plan in to keep half a million people in prison, in a parliament, in a country you can't name? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds! "Personally I think Libya should take the lot then send them back across the desert where they came from. These are not refugees they are mostly unskilled economic migrants who will end up in low paid (economically negative) jobs, the black economy, be a burden on the state, or (as we saw twice in France on the way down last week) resort to thieving. Or any combination you would like to choose. Trust me, there ain't many brain surgeons and rocket scientists in that lot. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds!
Personally I think Libya should take the lot then send them back across the desert where they came from.
These are not refugees they are mostly unskilled economic migrants who will end up in low paid (economically negative) jobs, the black economy, be a burden on the state, or (as we saw twice in France on the way down last week) resort to thieving. Or any combination you would like to choose.
Trust me, there ain't many brain surgeons and rocket scientists in that lot. "Now people are claiming Libya are in the EU!  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds!
Personally I think Libya should take the lot then send them back across the desert where they came from.
These are not refugees they are mostly unskilled economic migrants who will end up in low paid (economically negative) jobs, the black economy, be a burden on the state, or (as we saw twice in France on the way down last week) resort to thieving. Or any combination you would like to choose.
Trust me, there ain't many brain surgeons and rocket scientists in that lot.
Now people are claiming Libya are in the EU! "Where does it say that they have to stay inside the EU? The only stupidity I see is from someone who resorts to a couple of dozen or more Emojis because they have nothing sensible to say. Go on then. How many would YOU let in to the UK? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds!
Personally I think Libya should take the lot then send them back across the desert where they came from.
These are not refugees they are mostly unskilled economic migrants who will end up in low paid (economically negative) jobs, the black economy, be a burden on the state, or (as we saw twice in France on the way down last week) resort to thieving. Or any combination you would like to choose.
Trust me, there ain't many brain surgeons and rocket scientists in that lot.
Now people are claiming Libya are in the EU!
Where does it say that they have to stay inside the EU?
The only stupidity I see is from someone who resorts to a couple of dozen or more Emojis because they have nothing sensible to say.
Go on then. How many would YOU let in to the UK?"Well when asked which EU country they should be placed in, the country you named with Libya!
With regards to how many I think we should let in, I would say maybe 30,000, something like that. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds!
Personally I think Libya should take the lot then send them back across the desert where they came from.
These are not refugees they are mostly unskilled economic migrants who will end up in low paid (economically negative) jobs, the black economy, be a burden on the state, or (as we saw twice in France on the way down last week) resort to thieving. Or any combination you would like to choose.
Trust me, there ain't many brain surgeons and rocket scientists in that lot.
Now people are claiming Libya are in the EU!
Where does it say that they have to stay inside the EU?
The only stupidity I see is from someone who resorts to a couple of dozen or more Emojis because they have nothing sensible to say.
Go on then. How many would YOU let in to the UK?
Well when asked which EU country they should be placed in, the country you named with Libya!
With regards to how many I think we should let in, I would say maybe 30,000, something like that. "They will all be arriving at your house tomorrow by courier, and you are going to have to pay for all of them. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds!
Personally I think Libya should take the lot then send them back across the desert where they came from.
These are not refugees they are mostly unskilled economic migrants who will end up in low paid (economically negative) jobs, the black economy, be a burden on the state, or (as we saw twice in France on the way down last week) resort to thieving. Or any combination you would like to choose.
Trust me, there ain't many brain surgeons and rocket scientists in that lot.
Now people are claiming Libya are in the EU!
Where does it say that they have to stay inside the EU?
The only stupidity I see is from someone who resorts to a couple of dozen or more Emojis because they have nothing sensible to say.
Go on then. How many would YOU let in to the UK?
Well when asked which EU country they should be placed in, the country you named with Libya!
With regards to how many I think we should let in, I would say maybe 30,000, something like that. "Who said that I was answering your (loaded and stupid as usual) question? The first words I used were "personally I would" I don't really give a flying fuck about your questions or your opinion for that matter. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds!
Personally I think Libya should take the lot then send them back across the desert where they came from.
These are not refugees they are mostly unskilled economic migrants who will end up in low paid (economically negative) jobs, the black economy, be a burden on the state, or (as we saw twice in France on the way down last week) resort to thieving. Or any combination you would like to choose.
Trust me, there ain't many brain surgeons and rocket scientists in that lot.
Now people are claiming Libya are in the EU!
Where does it say that they have to stay inside the EU?
The only stupidity I see is from someone who resorts to a couple of dozen or more Emojis because they have nothing sensible to say.
Go on then. How many would YOU let in to the UK?
Well when asked which EU country they should be placed in, the country you named with Libya!
With regards to how many I think we should let in, I would say maybe 30,000, something like that.
Who said that I was answering your (loaded and stupid as usual) question?
The first words I used were "personally I would"
I don't really give a flying fuck about your questions or your opinion for that matter.
"Same here. But I will have the last laugh, because we are leaving the EU, which I gleefully voted for, and that fact will always annoy you! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds! "I never actually said that but not surprised you are attempting to misquote me. What I actually said was the new coalition government in Italy wants a huge crackdown on immigration. The Italians either want to deport 500,000 back to where they came from which is for the most part Libya and other African countries or negotiate with the EU in Brussels to relocate them in Europe. This will give the likes of Jean Claude D*unker and Tusk a huge headache because countries like Hungary have already ruled it out. It's a circle that the EU won't be able to square. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds!
I never actually said that but not surprised you are attempting to misquote me. What I actually said was the new coalition government in Italy wants a huge crackdown on immigration. The Italians either want to deport 500,000 back to where they came from which is for the most part Libya and other African countries or negotiate with the EU in Brussels to relocate them in Europe. This will give the likes of Jean Claude D*unker and Tusk a huge headache because countries like Hungary have already ruled it out. It's a circle that the EU won't be able to square. "Hopefully this will mean they have to go home, as in the Australian system, that works so well. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"500000 migrants divided by 27 EU countries is 18518 migrants per EU country. There, how simple was that? " Not so simple when countries such as Hungary have already stated in the past they wouldn't allow it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"500000 migrants divided by 27 EU countries is 18518 migrants per EU country. There, how simple was that? Not so simple when countries such as Hungary have already stated in the past they wouldn't allow it. " I thought that part of the EU was about equality? A Frenchman is as equal as a Bulgarian woman, who is as equal as a German transexual? They could of course, share out pro rata of population but I'm not that bored to sit and work that out! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds!
Personally I think Libya should take the lot then send them back across the desert where they came from.
These are not refugees they are mostly unskilled economic migrants who will end up in low paid (economically negative) jobs, the black economy, be a burden on the state, or (as we saw twice in France on the way down last week) resort to thieving. Or any combination you would like to choose.
Trust me, there ain't many brain surgeons and rocket scientists in that lot.
Now people are claiming Libya are in the EU!
Where does it say that they have to stay inside the EU?
The only stupidity I see is from someone who resorts to a couple of dozen or more Emojis because they have nothing sensible to say.
Go on then. How many would YOU let in to the UK?
Well when asked which EU country they should be placed in, the country you named with Libya!
With regards to how many I think we should let in, I would say maybe 30,000, something like that.
Who said that I was answering your (loaded and stupid as usual) question?
The first words I used were "personally I would"
I don't really give a flying fuck about your questions or your opinion for that matter.
Same here. But I will have the last laugh, because we are leaving the EU, which I gleefully voted for, and that fact will always annoy you!
"I hope that was aimed at CLCC because it will never annoy me. In fact I'm bloody well proud of you.
Just because I live in Germany doesn't mean that I'm a Europhile and although not a majority (yet) plenty of Germans are thinking the same. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds!
I never actually said that but not surprised you are attempting to misquote me. What I actually said was the new coalition government in Italy wants a huge crackdown on immigration. The Italians either want to deport 500,000 back to where they came from which is for the most part Libya and other African countries or negotiate with the EU in Brussels to relocate them in Europe. This will give the likes of Jean Claude D*unker and Tusk a huge headache because countries like Hungary have already ruled it out. It's a circle that the EU won't be able to square. "Right, so how many should Greece take? Spain? Belgium? How many should they take in your opinion? You seem set on the EU taking them, but not a member state. How do you square that circle? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Was indeed aimed at CLCC and absolutely not at you. I know exactly how Germany thinks! Germany is propping up the EU, and Germany has taken the most illegal, fake, economic migrants and has been ruined by it. I would be apoplectic if I was German and living in Germany." Make up your mind, are they economic migrants, or are they fake economic migrants? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds!
Personally I think Libya should take the lot then send them back across the desert where they came from.
These are not refugees they are mostly unskilled economic migrants who will end up in low paid (economically negative) jobs, the black economy, be a burden on the state, or (as we saw twice in France on the way down last week) resort to thieving. Or any combination you would like to choose.
Trust me, there ain't many brain surgeons and rocket scientists in that lot.
Now people are claiming Libya are in the EU!
Where does it say that they have to stay inside the EU?
The only stupidity I see is from someone who resorts to a couple of dozen or more Emojis because they have nothing sensible to say.
Go on then. How many would YOU let in to the UK?
Well when asked which EU country they should be placed in, the country you named with Libya!
With regards to how many I think we should let in, I would say maybe 30,000, something like that.
Who said that I was answering your (loaded and stupid as usual) question?
The first words I used were "personally I would"
I don't really give a flying fuck about your questions or your opinion for that matter.
Same here. But I will have the last laugh, because we are leaving the EU, which I gleefully voted for, and that fact will always annoy you!
I hope that was aimed at CLCC because it will never annoy me. In fact I'm bloody well proud of you.
Just because I live in Germany doesn't mean that I'm a Europhile and although not a majority (yet) plenty of Germans are thinking the same."This is why the formation of this new government in Italy is so important. The Italians now want to renegotiate management of Italian debt with the EU,and bring an end to austerity in Italy. This will require rich northern European countries like Germany and France effectively footing the bill for Italy's debt, and more money being needed to be pumped in to the ECB. I can't see Germans and French citizens being happy about it. If Italy don't get their way though it could lead to Italy either leaving the Euro or leaving the EU altogether. This is not like a Greece situation at all. I'm just so glad we In the UK are leaving this shit show and won't be on the hook to pay more for Italy's debt or be required to take thousands of migrants from Italy. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds!
I never actually said that but not surprised you are attempting to misquote me. What I actually said was the new coalition government in Italy wants a huge crackdown on immigration. The Italians either want to deport 500,000 back to where they came from which is for the most part Libya and other African countries or negotiate with the EU in Brussels to relocate them in Europe. This will give the likes of Jean Claude D*unker and Tusk a huge headache because countries like Hungary have already ruled it out. It's a circle that the EU won't be able to square.
Right, so how many should Greece take? Spain? Belgium? How many should they take in your opinion?
You seem set on the EU taking them, but not a member state. How do you square that circle? "Where have I said I'm set on the EU taking them? You're either hallucinating and seeing things that are not there on this thread or you're deliberately attempting to misquote me. I couldn't care less if Italy deport these migrants back to Libya or stick it to Juncker and Tusk in Brussels to fuck it up again. Thankfully we're leaving the EU thanks to the wisdom of the 52% who voted Leave so what happens down the line on this Italy situation won't affect us. As for your claim earlier that the UK should take some migrants because we're still a member, it doesn't work like that. The EU is not letting the UK stay in the Galileo satellite project (not that I want to stay in it I think we're better off developing our own) so if we're exempt from Galileo we should be exempt from any migrant relocation programme as well. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds!
I never actually said that but not surprised you are attempting to misquote me. What I actually said was the new coalition government in Italy wants a huge crackdown on immigration. The Italians either want to deport 500,000 back to where they came from which is for the most part Libya and other African countries or negotiate with the EU in Brussels to relocate them in Europe. This will give the likes of Jean Claude D*unker and Tusk a huge headache because countries like Hungary have already ruled it out. It's a circle that the EU won't be able to square.
Right, so how many should Greece take? Spain? Belgium? How many should they take in your opinion?
You seem set on the EU taking them, but not a member state. How do you square that circle?
Where have I said I'm set on the EU taking them? You're either hallucinating and seeing things that are not there on this thread or you're deliberately attempting to misquote me. I couldn't care less if Italy deport these migrants back to Libya or stick it to Juncker and Tusk in Brussels to fuck it up again. Thankfully we're leaving the EU thanks to the wisdom of the 52% who voted Leave so what happens down the line on this Italy situation won't affect us. As for your claim earlier that the UK should take some migrants because we're still a member, it doesn't work like that. The EU is not letting the UK stay in the Galileo satellite project (not that I want to stay in it I think we're better off developing our own) so if we're exempt from Galileo we should be exempt from any migrant relocation programme as well. "Right so for what, the 3rd time? Which country do you want to take the migrants to "stick it" to the EU? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's the same thing. They are fake migrants. They are not really fleeing any persecution, they are fakes. They are only coming to fleece the EU countries." How can one thing, and a fake version of that, be the same thing? If they are fake migrants, then they cannot be, by definition, actual migrants. They must be something else, like maybe if they are "fake" migrants, they could be real refugees. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds!
I never actually said that but not surprised you are attempting to misquote me. What I actually said was the new coalition government in Italy wants a huge crackdown on immigration. The Italians either want to deport 500,000 back to where they came from which is for the most part Libya and other African countries or negotiate with the EU in Brussels to relocate them in Europe. This will give the likes of Jean Claude D*unker and Tusk a huge headache because countries like Hungary have already ruled it out. It's a circle that the EU won't be able to square.
Right, so how many should Greece take? Spain? Belgium? How many should they take in your opinion?
You seem set on the EU taking them, but not a member state. How do you square that circle?
Where have I said I'm set on the EU taking them? You're either hallucinating and seeing things that are not there on this thread or you're deliberately attempting to misquote me. I couldn't care less if Italy deport these migrants back to Libya or stick it to Juncker and Tusk in Brussels to fuck it up again. Thankfully we're leaving the EU thanks to the wisdom of the 52% who voted Leave so what happens down the line on this Italy situation won't affect us. As for your claim earlier that the UK should take some migrants because we're still a member, it doesn't work like that. The EU is not letting the UK stay in the Galileo satellite project (not that I want to stay in it I think we're better off developing our own) so if we're exempt from Galileo we should be exempt from any migrant relocation programme as well.
Right so for what, the 3rd time? Which country do you want to take the migrants to "stick it" to the EU?
"For the 3rd time, couldn't care less what the EU do after we've left. It won't affect us now we're leaving. This whole episode highlights why we're better off out! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds!
Personally I think Libya should take the lot then send them back across the desert where they came from.
These are not refugees they are mostly unskilled economic migrants who will end up in low paid (economically negative) jobs, the black economy, be a burden on the state, or (as we saw twice in France on the way down last week) resort to thieving. Or any combination you would like to choose.
Trust me, there ain't many brain surgeons and rocket scientists in that lot.
Now people are claiming Libya are in the EU!
Where does it say that they have to stay inside the EU?
The only stupidity I see is from someone who resorts to a couple of dozen or more Emojis because they have nothing sensible to say.
Go on then. How many would YOU let in to the UK?"Are you not a migrant in Germany? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds!
I never actually said that but not surprised you are attempting to misquote me. What I actually said was the new coalition government in Italy wants a huge crackdown on immigration. The Italians either want to deport 500,000 back to where they came from which is for the most part Libya and other African countries or negotiate with the EU in Brussels to relocate them in Europe. This will give the likes of Jean Claude D*unker and Tusk a huge headache because countries like Hungary have already ruled it out. It's a circle that the EU won't be able to square.
Right, so how many should Greece take? Spain? Belgium? How many should they take in your opinion?
You seem set on the EU taking them, but not a member state. How do you square that circle?
Where have I said I'm set on the EU taking them? You're either hallucinating and seeing things that are not there on this thread or you're deliberately attempting to misquote me. I couldn't care less if Italy deport these migrants back to Libya or stick it to Juncker and Tusk in Brussels to fuck it up again. Thankfully we're leaving the EU thanks to the wisdom of the 52% who voted Leave so what happens down the line on this Italy situation won't affect us. As for your claim earlier that the UK should take some migrants because we're still a member, it doesn't work like that. The EU is not letting the UK stay in the Galileo satellite project (not that I want to stay in it I think we're better off developing our own) so if we're exempt from Galileo we should be exempt from any migrant relocation programme as well.
Right so for what, the 3rd time? Which country do you want to take the migrants to "stick it" to the EU?
For the 3rd time, couldn't care less what the EU do after we've left. It won't affect us now we're leaving. This whole episode highlights why we're better off out! "No, it doesn't, if you are unable to name which EU countries these people are going to go to, then it makes fuck all difference if we are in or out does it?
Try this thought experiment. If we stayed, how many of them would come to the UK? If we left, how many would come? If the answer to both is zero, it doesn't make any difference. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds!
I never actually said that but not surprised you are attempting to misquote me. What I actually said was the new coalition government in Italy wants a huge crackdown on immigration. The Italians either want to deport 500,000 back to where they came from which is for the most part Libya and other African countries or negotiate with the EU in Brussels to relocate them in Europe. This will give the likes of Jean Claude D*unker and Tusk a huge headache because countries like Hungary have already ruled it out. It's a circle that the EU won't be able to square.
Right, so how many should Greece take? Spain? Belgium? How many should they take in your opinion?
You seem set on the EU taking them, but not a member state. How do you square that circle?
Where have I said I'm set on the EU taking them? You're either hallucinating and seeing things that are not there on this thread or you're deliberately attempting to misquote me. I couldn't care less if Italy deport these migrants back to Libya or stick it to Juncker and Tusk in Brussels to fuck it up again. Thankfully we're leaving the EU thanks to the wisdom of the 52% who voted Leave so what happens down the line on this Italy situation won't affect us. As for your claim earlier that the UK should take some migrants because we're still a member, it doesn't work like that. The EU is not letting the UK stay in the Galileo satellite project (not that I want to stay in it I think we're better off developing our own) so if we're exempt from Galileo we should be exempt from any migrant relocation programme as well. "We are not exempt from Galileo, we may not be allowed continued participation in it because access to the encryption codes that it uses on the military side is restricted. And do you have any idea how much it takes to develop a system like that? You could wave goodbye to your (oh so mythical) Brexit dividend, plus about 10-20 years. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds!
I never actually said that but not surprised you are attempting to misquote me. What I actually said was the new coalition government in Italy wants a huge crackdown on immigration. The Italians either want to deport 500,000 back to where they came from which is for the most part Libya and other African countries or negotiate with the EU in Brussels to relocate them in Europe. This will give the likes of Jean Claude D*unker and Tusk a huge headache because countries like Hungary have already ruled it out. It's a circle that the EU won't be able to square.
Right, so how many should Greece take? Spain? Belgium? How many should they take in your opinion?
You seem set on the EU taking them, but not a member state. How do you square that circle?
Where have I said I'm set on the EU taking them? You're either hallucinating and seeing things that are not there on this thread or you're deliberately attempting to misquote me. I couldn't care less if Italy deport these migrants back to Libya or stick it to Juncker and Tusk in Brussels to fuck it up again. Thankfully we're leaving the EU thanks to the wisdom of the 52% who voted Leave so what happens down the line on this Italy situation won't affect us. As for your claim earlier that the UK should take some migrants because we're still a member, it doesn't work like that. The EU is not letting the UK stay in the Galileo satellite project (not that I want to stay in it I think we're better off developing our own) so if we're exempt from Galileo we should be exempt from any migrant relocation programme as well.
Right so for what, the 3rd time? Which country do you want to take the migrants to "stick it" to the EU?
For the 3rd time, couldn't care less what the EU do after we've left. It won't affect us now we're leaving. This whole episode highlights why we're better off out!
No, it doesn't, if you are unable to name which EU countries these people are going to go to, then it makes fuck all difference if we are in or out does it?
Try this thought experiment. If we stayed, how many of them would come to the UK? If we left, how many would come? If the answer to both is zero, it doesn't make any difference. "If we had remained in then you can bet the EU would have expected us to take some migrants if they develop an EU migrant relocation programme. The fact is now we are leaving it won't affect us. If we had stayed in we would've taken the EU quota number (which will be whatever figure they come up with in Brussels). Now we're leaving we don't have to take any. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds!
I never actually said that but not surprised you are attempting to misquote me. What I actually said was the new coalition government in Italy wants a huge crackdown on immigration. The Italians either want to deport 500,000 back to where they came from which is for the most part Libya and other African countries or negotiate with the EU in Brussels to relocate them in Europe. This will give the likes of Jean Claude D*unker and Tusk a huge headache because countries like Hungary have already ruled it out. It's a circle that the EU won't be able to square.
Right, so how many should Greece take? Spain? Belgium? How many should they take in your opinion?
You seem set on the EU taking them, but not a member state. How do you square that circle?
Where have I said I'm set on the EU taking them? You're either hallucinating and seeing things that are not there on this thread or you're deliberately attempting to misquote me. I couldn't care less if Italy deport these migrants back to Libya or stick it to Juncker and Tusk in Brussels to fuck it up again. Thankfully we're leaving the EU thanks to the wisdom of the 52% who voted Leave so what happens down the line on this Italy situation won't affect us. As for your claim earlier that the UK should take some migrants because we're still a member, it doesn't work like that. The EU is not letting the UK stay in the Galileo satellite project (not that I want to stay in it I think we're better off developing our own) so if we're exempt from Galileo we should be exempt from any migrant relocation programme as well.
Right so for what, the 3rd time? Which country do you want to take the migrants to "stick it" to the EU?
For the 3rd time, couldn't care less what the EU do after we've left. It won't affect us now we're leaving. This whole episode highlights why we're better off out!
No, it doesn't, if you are unable to name which EU countries these people are going to go to, then it makes fuck all difference if we are in or out does it?
Try this thought experiment. If we stayed, how many of them would come to the UK? If we left, how many would come? If the answer to both is zero, it doesn't make any difference.
If we had remained in then you can bet the EU would have expected us to take some migrants if they develop an EU migrant relocation programme. The fact is now we are leaving it won't affect us.
If we had stayed in we would've taken the EU quota number (which will be whatever figure they come up with in Brussels). Now we're leaving we don't have to take any. "But that would require treaty change, and unanimous support from all countries, which they wouldn't get, and that the UK could have vetoed. So none if we stayed and none if we left. No difference. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?"NONE | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
NONE"So how many should other member states take? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
There won't be an extension to article 50. We are leaving in March 2019. Therefore we shouldn't be taking any migrants from Italy.
There is, it's called the transition period.
Right, so you think the UK shouldn't take any, how many do you think Greece should take? How many should Spain take? How many should Hungary take?
No one should take any migrants. They should be sent home. They are economic migrants.
The former Australian Premier offered to show Europe how to deal with the problem. Europe should have accepted that help.
Australia had a similar problem with economic, fake migrants. Now they intercept the boats and tow them back to where they came from - mainly Indonesia, or they send them back in the same boats.
They don't allow any to land - the processing camps are on Pacific Islands, not mainland Australia.
And the numbers coming fell dramatically. The Australians know that to allow them, just allows the criminal smuggling gangs to thrive.
Australia only accepts 12-13,000 genuine migrants a year. In a country of that size with its small population.
So no individual member state should accept them, but the "EU" should take them according to Centaur's post.
Some people's stupidity and ignorance knows no bounds!
I never actually said that but not surprised you are attempting to misquote me. What I actually said was the new coalition government in Italy wants a huge crackdown on immigration. The Italians either want to deport 500,000 back to where they came from which is for the most part Libya and other African countries or negotiate with the EU in Brussels to relocate them in Europe. This will give the likes of Jean Claude D*unker and Tusk a huge headache because countries like Hungary have already ruled it out. It's a circle that the EU won't be able to square.
Right, so how many should Greece take? Spain? Belgium? How many should they take in your opinion?
You seem set on the EU taking them, but not a member state. How do you square that circle?
Where have I said I'm set on the EU taking them? You're either hallucinating and seeing things that are not there on this thread or you're deliberately attempting to misquote me. I couldn't care less if Italy deport these migrants back to Libya or stick it to Juncker and Tusk in Brussels to fuck it up again. Thankfully we're leaving the EU thanks to the wisdom of the 52% who voted Leave so what happens down the line on this Italy situation won't affect us. As for your claim earlier that the UK should take some migrants because we're still a member, it doesn't work like that. The EU is not letting the UK stay in the Galileo satellite project (not that I want to stay in it I think we're better off developing our own) so if we're exempt from Galileo we should be exempt from any migrant relocation programme as well.
Right so for what, the 3rd time? Which country do you want to take the migrants to "stick it" to the EU?
"It really doesn't matter...that's a matter for the EU to negotiate and decide amongst themselves; it should not, however, include us in any way, shape or form. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's the same thing. They are fake migrants. They are not really fleeing any persecution, they are fakes. They are only coming to fleece the EU countries. How can one thing, and a fake version of that, be the same thing? If they are fake migrants, then they cannot be, by definition, actual migrants. They must be something else, like maybe if they are "fake" migrants, they could be real refugees. " You're playing with semantics now, or if you're not, does that make you anti-semantic? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
NONE
So how many should other member states take?"That's a matter for the EU and the other member states to decide. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's the same thing. They are fake migrants. They are not really fleeing any persecution, they are fakes. They are only coming to fleece the EU countries. How can one thing, and a fake version of that, be the same thing? If they are fake migrants, then they cannot be, by definition, actual migrants. They must be something else, like maybe if they are "fake" migrants, they could be real refugees. You're playing with semantics now, or if you're not, does that make you anti-semantic? "Anti semitic Ken Livingston resigned from labour earlier, maybe anti semantic CLCC should resign from the forum. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's the same thing. They are fake migrants. They are not really fleeing any persecution, they are fakes. They are only coming to fleece the EU countries. How can one thing, and a fake version of that, be the same thing? If they are fake migrants, then they cannot be, by definition, actual migrants. They must be something else, like maybe if they are "fake" migrants, they could be real refugees. You're playing with semantics now, or if you're not, does that make you anti-semantic?
Anti semitic Ken Livingston resigned from labour earlier, maybe anti semantic CLCC should resign from the forum. "Must be fake news, the Labour Party aren’t anti semitic, ???? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
NONE
So how many should other member states take?
That's a matter for the EU and the other member states to decide."So why comment at all on the thread??? All of this is about decision being made by other people. Like I said, you guys want the EU to take 500,000 people, but not any of the member states. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
NONE
So how many should other member states take?
That's a matter for the EU and the other member states to decide.
So why comment at all on the thread??? All of this is about decision being made by other people.
Like I said, you guys want the EU to take 500,000 people, but not any of the member states. "So how many do you think each member state should take? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
NONE
So how many should other member states take?
That's a matter for the EU and the other member states to decide.
So why comment at all on the thread??? All of this is about decision being made by other people.
Like I said, you guys want the EU to take 500,000 people, but not any of the member states.
So how many do you think each member state should take? "I don't have a problem with them being shared in proportion to the population size of the country. After all, Italy could give all these people citizenship and they could legally go to live and work in any EU country anyway. Now I've answered the question, will you do the same? How many do you think they should take? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
NONE
So how many should other member states take?
That's a matter for the EU and the other member states to decide.
So why comment at all on the thread??? All of this is about decision being made by other people.
Like I said, you guys want the EU to take 500,000 people, but not any of the member states.
So how many do you think each member state should take?
I don't have a problem with them being shared in proportion to the population size of the country. After all, Italy could give all these people citizenship and they could legally go to live and work in any EU country anyway.
Now I've answered the question, will you do the same? How many do you think they should take? "I've answered it. We should take NONE, as we are leaving the EU,and have less and less participation in EU affairs . And the EU countries should decide between them how many they take...whether that's by population, GDP, or any other means. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
NONE
So how many should other member states take?
That's a matter for the EU and the other member states to decide.
So why comment at all on the thread??? All of this is about decision being made by other people.
Like I said, you guys want the EU to take 500,000 people, but not any of the member states.
So how many do you think each member state should take?
I don't have a problem with them being shared in proportion to the population size of the country. After all, Italy could give all these people citizenship and they could legally go to live and work in any EU country anyway.
Now I've answered the question, will you do the same? How many do you think they should take?
I've answered it.
We should take NONE, as we are leaving the EU,and have less and less participation in EU affairs . And the EU countries should decide between them how many they take...whether that's by population, GDP, or any other means."You haven't answered! You haven't said how many each should take, or a single method of deciding. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
NONE
So how many should other member states take?
That's a matter for the EU and the other member states to decide.
So why comment at all on the thread??? All of this is about decision being made by other people.
Like I said, you guys want the EU to take 500,000 people, but not any of the member states.
So how many do you think each member state should take?
I don't have a problem with them being shared in proportion to the population size of the country. After all, Italy could give all these people citizenship and they could legally go to live and work in any EU country anyway.
Now I've answered the question, will you do the same? How many do you think they should take?
I've answered it.
We should take NONE, as we are leaving the EU,and have less and less participation in EU affairs . And the EU countries should decide between them how many they take...whether that's by population, GDP, or any other means.
You haven't answered! You haven't said how many each should take, or a single method of deciding."What part of "the EU member countries should decide between them how many each of them should take" don't you understand? Although, tbh, that will take them about 15 years of discussions and negotiations. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
NONE
So how many should other member states take?
That's a matter for the EU and the other member states to decide.
So why comment at all on the thread??? All of this is about decision being made by other people.
Like I said, you guys want the EU to take 500,000 people, but not any of the member states.
So how many do you think each member state should take?
I don't have a problem with them being shared in proportion to the population size of the country. After all, Italy could give all these people citizenship and they could legally go to live and work in any EU country anyway.
Now I've answered the question, will you do the same? How many do you think they should take?
I've answered it.
We should take NONE, as we are leaving the EU,and have less and less participation in EU affairs . And the EU countries should decide between them how many they take...whether that's by population, GDP, or any other means.
You haven't answered! You haven't said how many each should take, or a single method of deciding.
What part of "the EU member countries should decide between them how many each of them should take" don't you understand? Although, tbh, that will take them about 15 years of discussions and negotiations.
"It's quite simple. You saying "EU members should decided" is quite opposite to you actually answering the question, isn't it? You are not answering the question, you are deferring to the EU. You haven't answered how many YOU think each member state should take. Neither has Centaur, maybe he has finally figured out that the EU is no more than a collection of member states, and the EU can't take people if the member states don't. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
NONE
So how many should other member states take?
That's a matter for the EU and the other member states to decide.
So why comment at all on the thread??? All of this is about decision being made by other people.
Like I said, you guys want the EU to take 500,000 people, but not any of the member states.
So how many do you think each member state should take?
I don't have a problem with them being shared in proportion to the population size of the country. After all, Italy could give all these people citizenship and they could legally go to live and work in any EU country anyway.
Now I've answered the question, will you do the same? How many do you think they should take?
I've answered it.
We should take NONE, as we are leaving the EU,and have less and less participation in EU affairs . And the EU countries should decide between them how many they take...whether that's by population, GDP, or any other means.
You haven't answered! You haven't said how many each should take, or a single method of deciding.
What part of "the EU member countries should decide between them how many each of them should take" don't you understand? Although, tbh, that will take them about 15 years of discussions and negotiations.
It's quite simple. You saying "EU members should decided" is quite opposite to you actually answering the question, isn't it? You are not answering the question, you are deferring to the EU. You haven't answered how many YOU think each member state should take. Neither has Centaur, maybe he has finally figured out that the EU is no more than a collection of member states, and the EU can't take people if the member states don't. "Here we go again.... I HAVE NO OPINION ON HOW MANY EACH EU COUNTRY SHOULD TAKE. IT IS UP TO THEM TO DECIDE. You do, but you can't give any numbers. The opinion that I do have is that, as the UK is leaving the EU, we should not take any. Now, everybody on here can understand what I've just said, and that I have said it several times now. You're the only one who can't, even though you're constantly ramming your superior intellect down everyone's throats! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
NONE
So how many should other member states take?
That's a matter for the EU and the other member states to decide.
So why comment at all on the thread??? All of this is about decision being made by other people.
Like I said, you guys want the EU to take 500,000 people, but not any of the member states.
So how many do you think each member state should take?
I don't have a problem with them being shared in proportion to the population size of the country. After all, Italy could give all these people citizenship and they could legally go to live and work in any EU country anyway.
Now I've answered the question, will you do the same? How many do you think they should take?
I've answered it.
We should take NONE, as we are leaving the EU,and have less and less participation in EU affairs . And the EU countries should decide between them how many they take...whether that's by population, GDP, or any other means.
You haven't answered! You haven't said how many each should take, or a single method of deciding.
What part of "the EU member countries should decide between them how many each of them should take" don't you understand? Although, tbh, that will take them about 15 years of discussions and negotiations.
It's quite simple. You saying "EU members should decided" is quite opposite to you actually answering the question, isn't it? You are not answering the question, you are deferring to the EU. You haven't answered how many YOU think each member state should take. Neither has Centaur, maybe he has finally figured out that the EU is no more than a collection of member states, and the EU can't take people if the member states don't.
Here we go again....
I HAVE NO OPINION ON HOW MANY EACH EU COUNTRY SHOULD TAKE. IT IS UP TO THEM TO DECIDE.
You do, but you can't give any numbers.
The opinion that I do have is that, as the UK is leaving the EU, we should not take any.
Now, everybody on here can understand what I've just said, and that I have said it several times now. You're the only one who can't, even though you're constantly ramming your superior intellect down everyone's throats!"Right, so if you have no opinion, then you haven't answered the question have you? It doesn't take a superior intellect to figure that out. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
NONE
So how many should other member states take?
That's a matter for the EU and the other member states to decide.
So why comment at all on the thread??? All of this is about decision being made by other people.
Like I said, you guys want the EU to take 500,000 people, but not any of the member states.
So how many do you think each member state should take?
I don't have a problem with them being shared in proportion to the population size of the country. After all, Italy could give all these people citizenship and they could legally go to live and work in any EU country anyway.
Now I've answered the question, will you do the same? How many do you think they should take?
I've answered it.
We should take NONE, as we are leaving the EU,and have less and less participation in EU affairs . And the EU countries should decide between them how many they take...whether that's by population, GDP, or any other means.
You haven't answered! You haven't said how many each should take, or a single method of deciding.
What part of "the EU member countries should decide between them how many each of them should take" don't you understand? Although, tbh, that will take them about 15 years of discussions and negotiations.
It's quite simple. You saying "EU members should decided" is quite opposite to you actually answering the question, isn't it? You are not answering the question, you are deferring to the EU. You haven't answered how many YOU think each member state should take. Neither has Centaur, maybe he has finally figured out that the EU is no more than a collection of member states, and the EU can't take people if the member states don't.
Here we go again....
I HAVE NO OPINION ON HOW MANY EACH EU COUNTRY SHOULD TAKE. IT IS UP TO THEM TO DECIDE.
You do, but you can't give any numbers.
The opinion that I do have is that, as the UK is leaving the EU, we should not take any.
Now, everybody on here can understand what I've just said, and that I have said it several times now. You're the only one who can't, even though you're constantly ramming your superior intellect down everyone's throats!
Right, so if you have no opinion, then you haven't answered the question have you?
It doesn't take a superior intellect to figure that out. "No, I haven't answered the question how you'd like it to be answered, but I have answered the question. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
NONE
So how many should other member states take?
That's a matter for the EU and the other member states to decide.
So why comment at all on the thread??? All of this is about decision being made by other people.
Like I said, you guys want the EU to take 500,000 people, but not any of the member states.
So how many do you think each member state should take?
I don't have a problem with them being shared in proportion to the population size of the country. After all, Italy could give all these people citizenship and they could legally go to live and work in any EU country anyway.
Now I've answered the question, will you do the same? How many do you think they should take?
I've answered it.
We should take NONE, as we are leaving the EU,and have less and less participation in EU affairs . And the EU countries should decide between them how many they take...whether that's by population, GDP, or any other means.
You haven't answered! You haven't said how many each should take, or a single method of deciding.
What part of "the EU member countries should decide between them how many each of them should take" don't you understand? Although, tbh, that will take them about 15 years of discussions and negotiations.
It's quite simple. You saying "EU members should decided" is quite opposite to you actually answering the question, isn't it? You are not answering the question, you are deferring to the EU. You haven't answered how many YOU think each member state should take. Neither has Centaur, maybe he has finally figured out that the EU is no more than a collection of member states, and the EU can't take people if the member states don't. "You said earlier that the UK should take 30,000. You've also said that every EU country should take an amount proportionate to their population within the EU's population. There are over 500,000 immigrants in Italy. The UK's population is about 13% of the EU's population. Your way of working it out would mean that we would have to take over 65,000. Who would take what we don't? Or are you just not very good at simple maths? Or maybe, you just haven't thought it through. So, 65,000 then? That's bigger than the size of Canterbury, Folkestone, Farnborough, Burton, to name but a few towns/cities with populations smaller than that. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
NONE
So how many should other member states take?
That's a matter for the EU and the other member states to decide.
So why comment at all on the thread??? All of this is about decision being made by other people.
Like I said, you guys want the EU to take 500,000 people, but not any of the member states.
So how many do you think each member state should take?
I don't have a problem with them being shared in proportion to the population size of the country. After all, Italy could give all these people citizenship and they could legally go to live and work in any EU country anyway.
Now I've answered the question, will you do the same? How many do you think they should take?
I've answered it.
We should take NONE, as we are leaving the EU,and have less and less participation in EU affairs . And the EU countries should decide between them how many they take...whether that's by population, GDP, or any other means.
You haven't answered! You haven't said how many each should take, or a single method of deciding.
What part of "the EU member countries should decide between them how many each of them should take" don't you understand? Although, tbh, that will take them about 15 years of discussions and negotiations.
It's quite simple. You saying "EU members should decided" is quite opposite to you actually answering the question, isn't it? You are not answering the question, you are deferring to the EU. You haven't answered how many YOU think each member state should take. Neither has Centaur, maybe he has finally figured out that the EU is no more than a collection of member states, and the EU can't take people if the member states don't.
You said earlier that the UK should take 30,000.
You've also said that every EU country should take an amount proportionate to their population within the EU's population.
There are over 500,000 immigrants in Italy.
The UK's population is about 13% of the EU's population. Your way of working it out would mean that we would have to take over 65,000.
Who would take what we don't?
Or are you just not very good at simple maths?
Or maybe, you just haven't thought it through.
So, 65,000 then?
That's bigger than the size of Canterbury, Folkestone, Farnborough, Burton, to name but a few towns/cities with populations smaller than that."Yet YOU still haven't answered the question. As it stands, Italy could say to all 500,000 (although other brexiters have claimed on this forum, this week, the number is 900,000), here is an Italian passport and citizenship, but you can only have it if you accept this one way ticket to Heathrow. Immigration is a net positive to the UK, so the number coming here doesn't really matter. Do you really, honestly care about the size of the population of the UK? If so, what are you doing about the number of children British people have? They are going to be economically inactive for the next 18 yrs or more, and absorb a huge amount of resources from child benefits, to health, education etc. My guess is that you are fine with this, but are bitching and moaning about people who come here to work and pay taxes. If you really cares about immigration to the UK, you would be calling for scrapping free movement of people from Eire, and calling for immigration checks on the NI land border, but your not. Why is that? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As expected after the result of these elections the 5 Star party and The League have now officially formed a coalition government in Italy. First on their agenda is a clash with the EU over management of Italian debt, and ending austerity in Italy which will cause the Europhile muppets in Brussels some major headaches. Huge problems with the Euro look to be on the cards. The new coalition government also want huge crackdown on immigration and looking to deport 500,000 or ask the EU to relocate them elsewhere in Europe, again causing major headaches for those in Brussels. How many migrants do you think the UK should take? No doubt you would say all of them. To be fair at least you are using the correct term for them now. Migrants NOT refugees. I highly doubt you know the immigration status of all of them, nor their background, I was simply using the term by Centaur. I'll ask you the same question, how many should the UK take? One more than Hungary.
I'm assuming you are suggesting that Hungary will take none, so you want the UK to take 1. Do you think that that will make Italy happy that they now only have 499,999?
The UK is in the process of leaving the EU, therefore the UK shouldn't be taking any mgrants from Italy. Hungary will also object to taking any.
But we haven't left yet, and want an extension on article 50 timescales, so how many should we take?
NONE
So how many should other member states take?
That's a matter for the EU and the other member states to decide.
So why comment at all on the thread??? All of this is about decision being made by other people.
Like I said, you guys want the EU to take 500,000 people, but not any of the member states.
So how many do you think each member state should take?
I don't have a problem with them being shared in proportion to the population size of the country. After all, Italy could give all these people citizenship and they could legally go to live and work in any EU country anyway.
Now I've answered the question, will you do the same? How many do you think they should take?
I've answered it.
We should take NONE, as we are leaving the EU,and have less and less participation in EU affairs . And the EU countries should decide between them how many they take...whether that's by population, GDP, or any other means.
You haven't answered! You haven't said how many each should take, or a single method of deciding.
What part of "the EU member countries should decide between them how many each of them should take" don't you understand? Although, tbh, that will take them about 15 years of discussions and negotiations.
It's quite simple. You saying "EU members should decided" is quite opposite to you actually answering the question, isn't it? You are not answering the question, you are deferring to the EU. You haven't answered how many YOU think each member state should take. Neither has Centaur, maybe he has finally figured out that the EU is no more than a collection of member states, and the EU can't take people if the member states don't.
You said earlier that the UK should take 30,000.
You've also said that every EU country should take an amount proportionate to their population within the EU's population.
There are over 500,000 immigrants in Italy.
The UK's population is about 13% of the EU's population. Your way of working it out would mean that we would have to take over 65,000.
Who would take what we don't?
Or are you just not very good at simple maths?
Or maybe, you just haven't thought it through.
So, 65,000 then?
That's bigger than the size of Canterbury, Folkestone, Farnborough, Burton, to name but a few towns/cities with populations smaller than that.
Yet YOU still haven't answered the question.
As it stands, Italy could say to all 500,000 (although other brexiters have claimed on this forum, this week, the number is 900,000), here is an Italian passport and citizenship, but you can only have it if you accept this one way ticket to Heathrow.
Immigration is a net positive to the UK, so the number coming here doesn't really matter.
Do you really, honestly care about the size of the population of the UK? If so, what are you doing about the number of children British people have? They are going to be economically inactive for the next 18 yrs or more, and absorb a huge amount of resources from child benefits, to health, education etc. My guess is that you are fine with this, but are bitching and moaning about people who come here to work and pay taxes.
If you really cares about immigration to the UK, you would be calling for scrapping free movement of people from Eire, and calling for immigration checks on the NI land border, but your not. Why is that? "I've answered it several times. Even proved, although you say you are intellectually superior to everyone else in these forums, you struggle with simple maths, and now basic English. And now, you are trying to deflect the debate from the specific problems Italy are having, to immigration in general, in order to say I'm racist without actually using the term to avoid a ban. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| back to top |  |
