Britain and the European Union

[dust]

It isn't the main thrust of the 'leave' argument anyway, I was replying to CT. Where it is a problem is public services such as housing, hospitals and schools. I'm not anti-immigration. I believe it's a very good thing and we need it, however not uncontrolled immigration and not immigration in such great chunks that it is causing problems in areas with high influxes of migrant workers. I can't help thinking it feels exactly like it used to be in British companies in which the managers got the white table cloths and oak panelled toilets and the rest were expected to live in crap. If you can afford private health, to live in an upmarket area and send the kids to private schools, then I don't imagine immigration is an issue. However, when you are condemned to live with the NHS, Comprehnsive schools and renting, then things are a lot bleaker.

 

The main problem the NHS faces, in my opinion, is an increasingly unhealthy and obnoxious population -- British and otherwise -- who refuse to do anything but drink, eat garbage, and fight and fuck like demented goats.

 

I've a family member in an NHS hospital at the moment and every time I go in there, I'm awe-struck by the preponderance of fat, gormless, bizarrely-dressed people waddling around, smoking right outside the doors, stuffing their faces with chips and chocolate bars...

[Karl]

The main problem the NHS faces, in my opinion, is an increasingly unhealthy and obnoxious population -- British and otherwise -- who refuse to do anything but drink, eat garbage, and fight and fuck like demented goats.

 

I've a family member in an NHS hospital at the moment and every time I go in there, I'm awe-struck by the preponderance of fat, gormless, bizarrely-dressed people waddling around, smoking right outside the doors, stuffing their faces with chips and chocolate bars...

 

That's what's referred to as moral hazard. Advertising 'free stuff' is as much a problem with the indigenous population as it is the immigrant, although it should be said that most of them have probably paid in a fair old wad of cash over the years. Being overweight, smoking, drinking and taking no exercise is not a consideration, just like the USSR, everyone is considered equal and the Government does the rationing. It's a useless system, but that's what we have and that's what immigrants will utilise on the same basis.

[Chang]

Well I was with you up to a point.  Don't you think that IDS, Gove and Boris should present some kind of prospectus for a way forward... ????

 

Why do we have to bow our heads meekly?  the Germans don't, the French don't so why should we?

 

The Germans do not bow their heads meekly because they pretty much rule the roost as regards the E.U.

 

The French do not bow their heads meekly but simply comply with whatever the Germans want (though they would never admit to this) and spend the Spring and Summer engaged is mass strikes, picketing and other activities designed to bring the country to standstill and causing disruption to anyone attempting to fly over or travel through France.

 

 

 

 

Vive la France and Vive la European Superstate!

[Karl]

Spot the violent socialists :-/

[Apech]

Spot the violent socialists :-/

 

 

Oh come on, I could show similar pics from England or the US.

[Apech]

The main problem the NHS faces, in my opinion, is an increasingly unhealthy and obnoxious population -- British and otherwise -- who refuse to do anything but drink, eat garbage, and fight and fuck like demented goats.

 

I've a family member in an NHS hospital at the moment and every time I go in there, I'm awe-struck by the preponderance of fat, gormless, bizarrely-dressed people waddling around, smoking right outside the doors, stuffing their faces with chips and chocolate bars...

 

That is, unfortunately completely spot on.  I would charge anyone who uses the NHS through self inflicted alcohol abuse - having had the experience of visiting ER on a Sunday morning.

[Chang]

Oh come on, I could show similar pics from England or the US.

 

You could indeed but the French have institutionalised such behaviour to the extent that one can almost set ones clock (or at the very least ones calendar) by it.

[Apech]

You could indeed but the French have institutionalised such behaviour to the extent that one can almost set ones clock (or at the very least ones calendar) by it.

 

 

I'll bet you are still sore about the Peninsular War.

[Chang]

I'll bet you are still sore about the Peninsular War.

 

Not in the least. I am simply a man who sits quietly and observes the way of the world. By observing what has occurred in the past and what is occurring now one has a pretty good chance of predicting what will happen in the future. This is a given in many instances as regards the French.

 

Unfortunately we appear to be ruled by a motley crew who believe that you can continue to make the same mistakes over and over and somehow achieve success through insane persistance. What can one do when presented with such madness?

[Apech]

Not in the least. I am simply a man who sits quietly and observes the way of the world. By observing what has occurred in the past and what is occurring now one has a pretty good chance of predicting what will happen in the future. This is a given in many instances as regards the French.

 

Unfortunately we appear to be ruled by a motley crew who believe that you can continue to make the same mistakes over and over and somehow achieve success through insane persistance. What can one do when presented with such madness?

 

I live not a million miles from the Lines of Torres Vedras whereby the Iron Duke defeated the Napoleonic army.   He did so, as you probably know by superior planning and logistics.  When we defeated the French in the Seven Years War it was similarly down to superior administration and decision making systems - although we like to attribute these things to valour in the field that's just the icing on the cake.  Watching the French and with keen eyes no doubt goes back to Edward 3 and the Black Prince.  Perhaps we should reinstate a claim for Gascony and Calais while we're at it.  What's ours is ours after all.

[C T]

What happened to the Green Tiger?  Ireland was doing very well before the 2008/9 bump.  And seemed to revive quickly afterwards also.

The Celtic Tiger was just an illusion created and driven by crooked and greedy bankers and gangsters, aided by a wimpish govt. 

 

Got a lot of people into trouble, with the richest man here at that time not spared the heartless machinations of dirty bankers and dirtier politicians. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Se%C3%A1n_Quinn

 

 

If you read of a revival, its just another attempted spin to hoodwink the naive Irish yet again. Their good-naturedness and lack of firmness and determination reminds some of India and the Indians under colonial rule way back when. Observing as a non-Irish, i can see that policies are shaped around this apparent weakness of the Irish people. Its very sad because for a long time the Irish as a people have been at the receiving end of shoddy governance, one which seems to opt for short term measures and placation whenever there is unease or economic turmoil in the country. Personally i dont see this changing anytime soon, especially when the last PM, a weak-minded ex-teacher was given a second term due to a hung election. It was farcical. 

[C T]

This will have a bearing on the referendum as well. 

 

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/eu-referendum-how-many-uk-citizens-live-european-union-where-infographic-1526116

[Karl]

Only if people listen to Camerons Shtick-which no doubt they will.

 

 

[C T]

Only if people listen to Camerons Shtick-which no doubt they will.

Im just wondering, of the million plus Brits living around the EU, how many will have to return should Brexit happen. 

[Karl]

Im just wondering, of the million plus Brits living around the EU, how many will have to return should Brexit happen. 

 

This is one of those questions that assumes a great many things.

 

1) That many living abroad don't already intend to come home at some point anyway. in fact it's very common for people to live abroad for a couple of years then come home. It's also not unusual for people to live abroad for six months of the year then travel back here in summer/winter. Some will come home if they get ill.

 

2) people already lived abroad prior to the EU.

 

3) Britain has no intention and neither would international law allow it to send immigrants home. It isn't exactly unthinkable that this would apply to UK citizens living in other countries.

 

4) if Europe changes for the worse then many will want to return anyway and there are no guarantees that other countries would drop out of the EU, or ignore open borders as they are currently doing right now.

 

There are no guarantees with any circumstances, things change, the referendum IS things changing and things can change in the EU itself. That's not how it will be spun of course. Instead people are told that it's a choice between a totally stable, unchanging EU and a vastly more unstable EU if we leave-not a vastly more unstable Britain because specifically on this issue it is the EU that is the problem.

[C T]

This is one of those questions that assumes a great many things.

It was a straightforward and simple ponderance, with no assumptions tied to it. 

[Karl]

It was a straightforward and simple ponderance, with no assumptions tied to it. 

 

Then I would guess that those people will be frightened and most will likely vote to remain. I have a lot of sympathy for their position. No attempt has been made by the establishment and its leave campaign, to attempt a serious debate on the subject. Instead it's just fear, fear and more fear. Basically they couldn't give a stuff for the British that have emigrated, except to scare them into voting to remain.

 

 

[C T]

Then I would guess that those people will be frightened and most will likely vote to remain. I have a lot of sympathy for their position. No attempt has been made by the establishment and its leave campaign, to attempt a serious debate on the subject. Instead it's just fear, fear and more fear. Basically they couldn't give a stuff for the British that have emigrated, except to scare them into voting to remain.

Thats a very likely scenario. 

[TomBrad]

I read something today that Brexit will lead to the disintegration of the United Kingdom.  It's more likely that remaining will lead to the break-up (and loss of identity) of the United Kingdom, as we lose more and more of our self-determination and head towards being a mere province administered by Brussels.

[Chang]

I read something today that Brexit will lead to the disintegration of the United Kingdom.  It's more likely that remaining will lead to the break-up (and loss of identity) of the United Kingdom, as we lose more and more of our self-determination and head towards being a mere province administered by Brussels.

 

Remaining within the E.U. will not maintain a United Kingdom.

 

Scotland is still wailing for independance, though that is only independance from the English as they are desperate to remain under the iron thumb of the E.U. We well know the problems in Ulster and whilst the call for Welsh home rule has been silent for a while we should not believe that it has gone away.

 

Leaving the E.U. will not rid us of problems but it will provide for us an opportunity at self determination as opposed to the thraldom we are destined to endure beneath the iron thumb of the European Superstate.

 

"Iron Thumb of the European Superstate." I do like that term and may use it again.

[C T]

Or iron thimble perhaps? Cant be leaving fingerprints on anything... lol

[Chang]

Or iron thimble perhaps? Cant be leaving fingerprints on anything... lol

 

I must admit that I did have Angela Merkel in mind. Big Thumb Uberfrau.

[Apech]

I recall at the height of the financial crisis when Portugal was being bailed out by the troika and everyone was prophesying doom there was a newspaper article (probably the Daily Mail) that the Royal Navy was ready to send ships to Lisbon to bring the ex-pat Brits home.  This was met with hoots of derision by various slightly over weight bright pink types sitting in bars in the Algarve.  Just forget everything you read in British press about Brits living abroad and what might happen to them.  Its all bananas.  True there are a few very unwise people who emigrate without proper funds or on a basis of some unrealistic dream.  But mostly people know what they are doing, what they want and get the best conditions for themselves that they can.  Why not? Life is short eh?

 

If you are British and have lived abroad for less than 15 years you can vote in the referendum.  I imagine many but not all will vote remain.  But actually in most cases being in or out will make very little difference as the UK most likely be treated a bit like the Swiss as quasi in but not actually in the EU.  I think very few will return because of Brexit - just as very few people will leave the UK who are non-nationals because of it.  The effects will be much longer term than the day to day practicalities of life and work.

Edited May 31, 2016 by Apech

[Karl]

Sound reasoning Sir.

[joeblast]

 I still think its funny to discuss this, as if the correct result will not be obtained

 

*ZH cherry pick*

 

--------------------

 

All Brits need to read this, vote in or out, we will be kept in...

 

"The machinery to keep the UK as part of the EU was decided long before the referendum was announced.

 

The referendum is just a safety valve to placate those citizens upset by the way they have little say in how their affairs are decided. It's a bit like last year's Magna Carta celebrations. Yes there was a party and much pomp and pagentry but the media was not allowed to discuss the substance of Magna Carta. Any mention of habeus corpus; the power given under Magna Carta to order the government to produce a prisoner and then justify in open court why the prisoner was being detained, had been silently discarded by the government and Ministry of Justice.  There was very little discussion of this because of the censorship and the celebrations which  diverted the public's mind away from the real importance of Magna Carta. 

 

They are able to do this by the clerks in the high court referring all such complaints to the administrative side of the courts.

 

Here an understanding of how the courts work is necessary. 

 

At a time which is not certain, because I doubt that it was recorded, but I guess about ten years ago, one could go to the Royal Courts of Justice in the Strand and lay a complaint at common law that someone had caused you harm or loss. There would be no charge to lay such a complaint, neither would there be any court costs because as Magna Carta dictates -  justice should be free and available to all.

About that time Lord Levenson introduced his Guide to the Queens Bench.

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/qb-guide-2016-fi...

 

In this he describes the three different catagories of Queens Bench but omits the fourth, the common law court of record. Who knows precisely why he did that; but a fair guess is that any one UK resident could make a complaint at common law that his prime minister had caused him harm by giving away his sovereignty. The judge in a common law court goes on his oath of office. If he does not follow precedent he can be sued. In all other courts although the man with a sheeps wool wig (Wolf in sheep's clothing?) is called a judge in law he is not a judge. He is just a clerk working for the company known as the ministry of justice. This is why they are called administrative courts which conduct the business of the court. These pretend judges cannot be sued because the rules of the business, a statute also called an act with exactly the same meaning as a stage act, created by parliament,  has given these clerks a protected status. This means that they do not have to follow the rules of law that the rest of the population have to do. You might now understand why some very strange decisions are made by these pretend judges.

One persistent man was able to get past the Clerks at Royal Courts of Justice but when he tried to present his case at common law, the judge said he had no jurisdiction because he refused to go on his oath of office.

 

You might now be wondering what this has to do with the referendum. It's because Cameron has already stated that he will use the Lisbon treaty to leave the EU if the vote is to leave.  Bear in mind that when in opposition, Cameron rubbished the Lisbon treaty. He knows that it was designed by unelected bureaucrats to make it difficult for any country to leave and anyway is subject to qualified majority voting.

After June the 23rd and we vote to exit the EU, the population will breathe a sigh of relief that it's all over and leave it to the politicians to get on with it; after all isn't that what we pay them for.?.

 

This is where Cameron and Osborne are correct. All parties agree that it will take at least two years of negotiations during which time the uncertainty will cause the predicted depression  in the economy. This will reverse most of the opinions of the leave group who will change their mind and agree to stay in.

During which time Parliament will vote through the bill which is waiting in the wings,                   having already been debated and just waiting  to be signed into law.

 

http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2013-14/rightsofthesovereignandthedu...

Act not reported in the media removes from the Queen the duty  to veto a bill that is against her subject's sovereignty.

 

You might be puzzling and wonder what this has to do with Parliament's duty to act in the public's interest. Wonder no more.

 

Before 1972 when Prime Minister Edward Heath signed the Treaty of Rome for us to join the common market, now the EU. he asked the top law officer at the time the legal implications of signing the treaty. This man, the Lord Chancellor Lord Kilmuir described our constitution evolving from Magna Carta and even before, and wrote that  giving away our sovereignty to another state would be illegal.  Heath  still signed it and misled parliament by stating that there was no loss of sovereignty. Before he died he admitted his conduct in his memoirs.

 

Here an understanding of the international law of treaties will help you see what the government's problem is and what is really is motivating them. Any treaty where fraud or deception is used is immediately null and void. So since 1972 when more illegal treaties have been signed the government has kept this fact from you. The letter was hidden under the thirty year rule but was prized from the archives by an activist. Then the government machine was cranked up to block any move to expose the subject to the public. The media know of the letter but dare not discuss it. The eurosceptic politicians know of the letter but will not admit in public to it's existence. So you have the British public in a state of confusion with all the lying statistics from both sides of the Brexit argument. Don't you think that their minds would be clarified if they knew that we had joined the EU by power mad controllers who lied to them?

 

 

 

There is one silver lining to this cloud. The government's censorship must have been so good that the parliament petitions committee did not realise the significance of a petition presented to them = 

"We require Lord Kilmuir's letter to Edward Heath be debated in parliament". The letter can be read from a link on this site.

 

 https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/122770

If this petition gets to 10,000 before 23rd June, the government has to comment on it. This should release those previously censored as the letter's existence would be acknowledged on a government's own site.

 

The problem is that the petition has such a boring and obscure title and more importantly even the so called alternative media with the notable exception of Don Hank and Rodney Atkinson whose site "Freenations" promotes it.  Rodney Atkinson was the man who together with Norris McWhirter took John Major, Francis Maude and Douglas Hurd to court for Misprison of treason for signing the Maastricht Treaty. The attorney general then took it over and said there was no case to answer; presumably when not being on his oath of office.

 

So  dear reader, if you live in the UK, please sign the petition and get everyone you know to sign it.

Think about it; if you are caught doing something wrong you have to stop doing it. Get this letter's contents into the public domain and you can then demand that the treaties be declared null and void so that the laws that gave away our sovereignty back to 1972 would revert back to the position pertaining in 1972. 

 

Follow the thought through and you will realise that our exclusive 12 mile fishing boundary would be returned over night. Alright there might be some stock market jitters but the jitters felt by the other EU countries would cause them to consider what best suits them is for our trading arrangements to remain the same. The European army and other evils we could just walk away without too much trouble. So please do not let these politicians confuse you by their convoluted rhetoric. The matter is clear and simple. The EU treaties are against our laws. We the people need to get this fact out to one and all."

Edited May 31, 2016 by joeblast