As a Times subscriber I am dismayed that the paper has endorsed Remain subject to no return to business as usual in the EU. Honestly, how utterly naïve can you get?
As a Times subscriber I am dismayed that the paper has endorsed Remain subject to no return to business as usual in the EU. Honestly, how utterly naïve can you get?
Maybe it's a clever bit of reverse psychology, which they know their readers are smart enough to get.
The Times: what idiotic hand wringing. A dismal return to business as usual is exactly what we'll get with Remain and the Referendum will have resolved nothing.
If the EU was going to "reform" they'd have done in when they had a fantastic opportunity to "reform" AKA Cameron's non-negotiation renegotiation.
The British government/political class (from Cameron down) have absolutely no desire to see the EU "reform". In fact they're all signed up to more "integration" whenever they think they can get away with it.
So of course it will back to "business as usual". Actually it will be worse than business as usual because we'll be forever locked in to the ever expanding superstate (the political class will not dare have another referendum after these past weeks you can be sure of that)
Now, business as usual short term, and long term submergence into the Superstate is a perfectly legitimate position for the UK to be in but people should at least be honest about, not delude themselves they are voting for REMAIN but they'll be an on-going process of "reform" and other opportunities to LEAVE. It's a non-starter.
Sky news are highlighting the poisonous nature of the referendum campaign and highlighting Farage and the poster. This is not coming over well and goodness knows what it is doing to the thoughts of the ordinary voter. I have come to the conclusion no one will win this no matter who does as the rancour is so deep I do not know how the Nation will be reconsiled
It's hard to know what effect the awful events of yesterday will have on the referendum but if I had to make a guess I'd say not much.
I suspect they will poll about the murder and everybody will agree it was a shockingly awful and terrible act, but when they're asked if it will change how they intend to vote in the referendum (or whether they think LEAVE is to blame) most people will say no.
However, it will have an effect on a very tiny minority of the electorate and if the vote is close enough on the day, it's possible these switchers could be decisive... But I'm actually expecting a reasonably decisive vote for the winner on the day (just not sure whether that will be LEAVE or REMAIN yet)
Just to throw this into the mix - having dinner with two folks who are Remain inclined, but are getting all weirded out by the extraordinary coincidence of Jo's death - and how convenient it all is for Remain.....
As a Times subscriber I am dismayed that the paper has endorsed Remain subject to no return to business as usual in the EU. Honestly, how utterly naïve can you get?
It is what most of their readers really want that is why
The Times: what idiotic hand wringing. A dismal return to business as usual is exactly what we'll get with Remain and the Referendum will have resolved nothing.
If the EU was going to "reform" they'd have done in when they had a fantastic opportunity to "reform" AKA Cameron's non-negotiation renegotiation.
The British government/political class (from Cameron down) have absolutely no desire to see the EU "reform". In fact they're all signed up to more "integration" whenever they think they can get away with it.
So of course it will back to "business as usual". Actually it will be worse than business as usual because we'll be forever locked in to the ever expanding superstate (the political class will not dare have another referendum after these past weeks you can be sure of that)
Now, business as usual short term, and long term submergence into the Superstate is a perfectly legitimate position for the UK to be in but people should at least be honest about, not delude themselves they are voting for REMAIN but they'll be an on-going process of "reform" and other opportunities to LEAVE. It's a non-starter.
The thing that really irritates me is that, knowing that the EU was never going to reform, why didn't he instead negotiate a change in the UK's relationship with (that unchanging) EU?
Why didn't he try and get something like, oh I don't know, a Special Status, carving us out of the whole EU ever closer union superstate bandwagon so that it could carry on with its superstate thing but we could say: "Non!", and just enjoy the stuff that we like, the single market, that sort of thing.
Personally I think Care in the Community is responsible for the death of Jo Cox Lee Rigby and many others.
The countrys mental hospitals were closed down and people thrown out on the streets with no one even to make sure they took their medicine.
Remind me which health secretary was responsible for doing it?
Why don't you remind us?
Care in the community has been advocated since the 60s . Enoch Powell was in favour of it. And frankly so am I if you fund it and control properly. Sadly neither has been done.
Its not care in the community......its lets wash our hands of them and save some money.
Wasnt that the whole point. - exploit a few naive processors views and use it as an excuse to shut dozens of vital mental hospitals to fund cutting the higher rate of tax to 40%.
Years ago there was a huge mental hospital at Banstead. After it was shut it was knocked down and a prison was built on the site. It is said apochraphally thst the inmates are the a.same people.
That sums up care in the community.
The policy of closing long stay mental hospitals long predated tax cuts, and has been carried on by all governments of the last 50 years. Sadly there is indeed a strong inverse correlation with prison figures.
This murder does raise issues of access to mental health services, but also does risk stigmatising the mentally ill. Clinical mental illness is quite common with 1/9 men and 1/6 women being treated for it at some point in their life. Blaming mental illness for this killing is something that is a bit too simplistic. He may have had quite different motivations for the attack, as yet unrevealed. Breivik was judged sane as were the killers of Lee Rigby, as indeed are most more prosaic killers. It is very possible that he is "bad rather than mad" in the sense of culpability.
Was he of sufficiently sound mind at the time of the killing to understand the consequences of his actions? This will be an issue for the courts to decide. You remove a persons dignity and existence as a free thinking individual by assuming too glibly his insanity.
What are we going to do with all that sovereignty when we win? I propose banishing the FT to Frankfurt.
I think you will find that they need access to our money markets more than our money markets need access to them. That is why London trade more $s than New York and China came to London as well.
Even this BBC piece seems more pessimistic about that happening thatthe Times
As dark as the mood is in Brussels and beyond, it's also fervently felt in many circles that the UK referendum is a clear message that the EU must reform.
The problem is not that EU bureaucrats and supporting politicians don't occasionally recognise, or claim to recognise, the the EU must reform. It's that they end up reverting to reacting against anything meaningful, again fearing contagion, and the words turn to nothing.
I'm getting really nervy about how big an economic shock we will face, and how poorly we may be governed in the aftermath, and it's that great big inability to reform that is the thing pushing me on at present.
Because they don't genuinely want to reform, or think they need to. If they did, they would not need to do it at the barrel of a metaphorical gun, they would not need to be dragged unwilling to it, they would not undermine it at every step with derogatory attitudes to anyone other than arch europhiles. They simply don't mean it, even if in the moment, and only for a moment, when in a panic, they think they mean it.
"Reform" from our point of view, means Brussels doing less. From the Eurocrats' point of view, it means Brussels being more efficient.
Well exactly. It reminds me of staff junkets with 'innovative' thinkers on 'lean solutions' or the like, who present as being flexible but actually have a single view they interpret everything to fit.
Your problem is poor maintenance of printing facilities so they break down a lot? Have you tried not printing things.
Yes, that might be a good thing as well, cost saving, but it is not actually a solution to the problem raised.
Your problem, and that of some others in Europe is too much power going to the EU? How about we be more efficient?
Yes, that would be a good thing as well. But it doesn't address the problem I raised.
As a Times subscriber I am dismayed that the paper has endorsed Remain subject to no return to business as usual in the EU. Honestly, how utterly naïve can you get?
It is what most of their readers really want that is why
Personally I think Care in the Community is responsible for the death of Jo Cox Lee Rigby and many others.
The countrys mental hospitals were closed down and people thrown out on the streets with no one even to make sure they took their medicine.
Remind me which health secretary was responsible for doing it?
Why don't you remind us?
Care in the community has been advocated since the 60s . Enoch Powell was in favour of it. And frankly so am I if you fund it and control properly. Sadly neither has been done.
Its not care in the community......its lets wash our hands of them and save some money.
Wasnt that the whole point. - exploit a few naive processors views and use it as an excuse to shut dozens of vital mental hospitals to fund cutting the higher rate of tax to 40%.
Years ago there was a huge mental hospital at Banstead. After it was shut it was knocked down and a prison was built on the site. It is said apochraphally thst the inmates are the a.same people.
That sums up care in the community.
A friend did some research at a school and young offenders institution - 80% of residents/ inmates had neurodevelopmental disorders (ASD, ADD, Dyslexia, Dyspraxia).
The Leave campaign has not needed to varnish reality, but has done so anyway. It is not true that Britain sends £350 million a week to Brussels. According to the UK Statistics Authority, the actual figure is £136 million. It is not true that EU migration is the main cause of pressure on the NHS. That pressure comes from an ageing population and the rising cost of treatments. It is not true that Turkey is on a path to EU membership, for all that Mr Cameron was a supporter of the idea until as recently as 2014. Since then, Ankara under President Erdogan has shown decreasing interest in accession, which takes a minimum of 15 years and which France and Germany would veto anyway.
It is not true, finally, that Brexit would answer at a stroke the prayers of those Vote Leave is wooing. This is especially so in Labour strongholds where most social problems predate the EU’s expansion and most immigration is from outside Europe.
For a bit of light relief, good piece on Trump's polling. First time I can recall a politician being described in the mainstream media as being "broadly detested"...
I find it slightly curious that the police have released so little information themselves so far. Two possible reasons come to mind, but it's still too early to discuss them.
The Leave campaign has not needed to varnish reality, but has done so anyway. It is not true that Britain sends £350 million a week to Brussels. According to the UK Statistics Authority, the actual figure is £136 million. It is not true that EU migration is the main cause of pressure on the NHS. That pressure comes from an ageing population and the rising cost of treatments. It is not true that Turkey is on a path to EU membership, for all that Mr Cameron was a supporter of the idea until as recently as 2014. Since then, Ankara under President Erdogan has shown decreasing interest in accession, which takes a minimum of 15 years and which France and Germany would veto anyway.
It is not true, finally, that Brexit would answer at a stroke the prayers of those Vote Leave is wooing. This is especially so in Labour strongholds where most social problems predate the EU’s expansion and most immigration is from outside Europe.
What are we going to do with all that sovereignty when we win? I propose banishing the FT to Frankfurt.
I think you will find that they need access to our money markets more than our money markets need access to them. That is why London trade more $s than New York and China came to London as well.
You do not understand why leaving the EU would be so damaging to The City.
Having explained it here a thousand times, and to save every other poster's sanity, I am not going to tell you why it would be. You can google stuff.
I'm not on Twitter or other social media, but having clicked on the General Boles link below, I had to laugh at the retweet from Angela Eagle. Asked why she supports the most corrupt, undemocratic organisation in the world, she replies 'I don't support Fifa'. Fair play, that's a good one.
What are we going to do with all that sovereignty when we win? I propose banishing the FT to Frankfurt.
I think you will find that they need access to our money markets more than our money markets need access to them. That is why London trade more $s than New York and China came to London as well.
The timing of Jo Cox's death isn't a coincidence. The primary purpose of Terrorism is to promote Terror. The the amount of terror caused by any act depends on a number of things but killing an MP at the climax of a internationally significant referendum maximises three things. #1 Media coverage #2 Divisiveness ( look at PB threads ) #3 Political impact ( look at PB threads ) For instance if IS has the capacity to attempt an attack in the UK this summer do you really think they would try to do it before or on 23rd June if they could ? It's common sense.
As this Lib Dem (along with a small but significant minority) will be voting LEAVE, I'm not sure all the sad old stereotypes of LDs being Europhiles has anything other than trolling value.
It's also worth reminding some on here Nick Clegg might have supported AV but it has never been Lib Dem policy and I voted NO as did, I suspect, a number of LDs.
Back to more immediate matters, out walking with Mrs Stodge this evening and discussing the EU Referendum (she's a LEAVE supporter too which helps domestic harmony no end). It occurred to me that in trying to finally put an end to a question which has afflicted the Conservative Party for 30 years, David Cameron unwittingly raised a question which has bothered many in Britain for sixty years.
A referendum on the EU has been replaced by a referendum on immigration.
This LD voted against AV. It is a pretty crap system, but I would have voted for a good PR system with constituency links (like in Scotland and Wales). I will be voting Remain. No party is a monolith (bizarrely polls show 5% of kippers voting Remain. It is quite hard to know why!)
It is turning into a referendum on immigration though.
Anecdote: today I was interviewing a Greek Doctor for a post. We got to the mandatory HR questions at the end that get asked of all candidates. One was "Do you need a work Visa?" He smiled and said "Not this week". Droll enough to make dry jokes in interviews? Give him the job!
Oh how we will laugh when the immigration police haul him out of clinic and on a plane to Athens in handcuffs!
Ah.. Greek doctors looking for work here! Isn't the way the Euro has destroyed the Greek health system just fantastic?
Greece has long been a net exporter of Doctors. Greece trains twice as many per capita than we do:
Go in any hospital in Germany, UK or USA and you will find Greek trained doctors.
The fellow today has a wife with a decent job in Greece, and a private practice that he can live comfortably on. He wants to come here to stretch himself professionally, pick up new skills then return back. He likes the collegiate way that the NHS works.
seems perfectly reasonable to me, the Times piece. We are part of the European family. We might think our family could do with changing, but we don't leave them in a fit of petulance
The Times: what idiotic hand wringing. A dismal return to business as usual is exactly what we'll get with Remain and the Referendum will have resolved nothing.
If the EU was going to "reform" they'd have done in when they had a fantastic opportunity to "reform" AKA Cameron's non-negotiation renegotiation.
The British government/political class (from Cameron down) have absolutely no desire to see the EU "reform". In fact they're all signed up to more "integration" whenever they think they can get away with it.
So of course it will back to "business as usual". Actually it will be worse than business as usual because we'll be forever locked in to the ever expanding superstate (the political class will not dare have another referendum after these past weeks you can be sure of that)
Now, business as usual short term, and long term submergence into the Superstate is a perfectly legitimate position for the UK to be in but people should at least be honest about, not delude themselves they are voting for REMAIN but they'll be an on-going process of "reform" and other opportunities to LEAVE. It's a non-starter.
The thing that really irritates me is that, knowing that the EU was never going to reform, why didn't he instead negotiate a change in the UK's relationship with (that unchanging) EU?
Why didn't he try and get something like, oh I don't know, a Special Status, carving us out of the whole EU ever closer union superstate bandwagon so that it could carry on with its superstate thing but we could say: "Non!", and just enjoy the stuff that we like, the single market, that sort of thing.
BUT WAIT!
That's just what he did do.
No he really didn't. He tried for and got just enough of a smokescreen so that idiots like you would be able to convince yourself he had achieved anything at all.
As a Times subscriber I am dismayed that the paper has endorsed Remain subject to no return to business as usual in the EU. Honestly, how utterly naïve can you get?
Maybe it's a clever bit of reverse psychology, which they know their readers are smart enough to get.
It was from a few months ago but Yougov's polling showed a majority of Times' readers want to stay in the EU. Giving their readers what they want shocker. Hardly comparable to (non-dom owned) Indy backing another Tory led coalition last year!
I wonder if Murdoch has changed his view on what The Sun should be? He's always liked to back the winner before but I suspect with the anti-establishment mood around now he might want the currant bun to be 'the people's voice' holding the great and the good's feet to the fire.
The Times: what idiotic hand wringing. A dismal return to business as usual is exactly what we'll get with Remain and the Referendum will have resolved nothing.
If the EU was going to "reform" they'd have done in when they had a fantastic opportunity to "reform" AKA Cameron's non-negotiation renegotiation.
The British government/political class (from Cameron down) have absolutely no desire to see the EU "reform". In fact they're all signed up to more "integration" whenever they think they can get away with it.
So of course it will back to "business as usual". Actually it will be worse than business as usual because we'll be forever locked in to the ever expanding superstate (the political class will not dare have another referendum after these past weeks you can be sure of that)
Now, business as usual short term, and long term submergence into the Superstate is a perfectly legitimate position for the UK to be in but people should at least be honest about, not delude themselves they are voting for REMAIN but they'll be an on-going process of "reform" and other opportunities to LEAVE. It's a non-starter.
The thing that really irritates me is that, knowing that the EU was never going to reform, why didn't he instead negotiate a change in the UK's relationship with (that unchanging) EU?
Why didn't he try and get something like, oh I don't know, a Special Status, carving us out of the whole EU ever closer union superstate bandwagon so that it could carry on with its superstate thing but we could say: "Non!", and just enjoy the stuff that we like, the single market, that sort of thing.
BUT WAIT!
That's just what he did do.
No he really didn't. He tried for and got just enough of a smokescreen so that idiots like you would be able to convince yourself he had achieved anything at all.
We shouldn't call each other idiots. Please, let's be civil.
Let's just say that many of us are unconvinced that anything other than treaty change would hold up under a challenge from the ECJ, and there is an additional small risk that the EU parliament would prove difficult. The optics of managing a Remain vote should the EU fail to honour Cameron's agreement would be extremely challenging.
The Times: what idiotic hand wringing. A dismal return to business as usual is exactly what we'll get with Remain and the Referendum will have resolved nothing.
If the EU was going to "reform" they'd have done in when they had a fantastic opportunity to "reform" AKA Cameron's non-negotiation renegotiation.
The British government/political class (from Cameron down) have absolutely no desire to see the EU "reform". In fact they're all signed up to more "integration" whenever they think they can get away with it.
So of course it will back to "business as usual". Actually it will be worse than business as usual because we'll be forever locked in to the ever expanding superstate (the political class will not dare have another referendum after these past weeks you can be sure of that)
Now, business as usual short term, and long term submergence into the Superstate is a perfectly legitimate position for the UK to be in but people should at least be honest about, not delude themselves they are voting for REMAIN but they'll be an on-going process of "reform" and other opportunities to LEAVE. It's a non-starter.
The thing that really irritates me is that, knowing that the EU was never going to reform, why didn't he instead negotiate a change in the UK's relationship with (that unchanging) EU?
Why didn't he try and get something like, oh I don't know, a Special Status, carving us out of the whole EU ever closer union superstate bandwagon so that it could carry on with its superstate thing but we could say: "Non!", and just enjoy the stuff that we like, the single market, that sort of thing.
BUT WAIT!
That's just what he did do.
No he really didn't. He tried for and got just enough of a smokescreen so that idiots like you would be able to convince yourself he had achieved anything at all.
On the sauce again tonight Richard?
But you're right. He cunningly assembled the other 27 heads of state, agreed a deal, and then as soon as the poor suckers vote Remain, will hold up his "Bluff" sign and we'll all be using the euro by Christmas.
Something very odd about that article, the bloke was collecting Nazi regalia whilst teaching migrants.
Had mixed-race brother too. They got on fine...
You think this smells?
I think its odd, it seems every time somebody gets murdered the BBC crowbar "far right tendencies" into the story. The article is contradictory at best.
And before anybody gets excited I've already stated the killer should be executed.
Personally I think Care in the Community is responsible for the death of Jo Cox Lee Rigby and many others.
The countrys mental hospitals were closed down and people thrown out on the streets with no one even to make sure they took their medicine.
Remind me which health secretary was responsible for doing it?
Why don't you remind us?
Care in the community has been advocated since the 60s . Enoch Powell was in favour of it. And frankly so am I if you fund it and control properly. Sadly neither has been done.
Its not care in the community......its lets wash our hands of them and save some money.
Wasnt that the whole point. - exploit a few naive processors views and use it as an excuse to shut dozens of vital mental hospitals to fund cutting the higher rate of tax to 40%.
Years ago there was a huge mental hospital at Banstead. After it was shut it was knocked down and a prison was built on the site. It is said apochraphally thst the inmates are the a.same people.
That sums up care in the community.
The policy of closing long stay mental hospitals long predated tax cuts, and has been carried on by all governments of the last 50 years. Sadly there is indeed a strong inverse correlation with prison figures.
This murder does raise issues of access to mental health services, but also does risk stigmatising the mentally ill. Clinical mental illness is quite common with 1/9 men and 1/6 women being treated for it at some point in their life. Blaming mental illness for this killing is something that is a bit too simplistic. He may have had quite different motivations for the attack, as yet unrevealed. Breivik was judged sane as were the killers of Lee Rigby, as indeed are most more prosaic killers. It is very possible that he is "bad rather than mad" in the sense of culpability.
Was he of sufficiently sound mind at the time of the killing to understand the consequences of his actions? This will be an issue for the courts to decide. You remove a persons dignity and existence as a free thinking individual by assuming too glibly his insanity.
"The invasion of Iraq was a mistake. It was wrong to say that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. Tony Blair was selective about the intelligence reports, preferring those that told him what he already believed. These things may seem self-evident, four years into a violent and chaotic war, but coming from Lord Guthrie they have an impact approaching shock and awe.
"I felt it was right at the time," the former head of the armed forces says of the decision to attack Saddam to stop him attacking us. "Now I'm not so sure. In fact I think it was probably wrong."
Something very odd about that article, the bloke was collecting Nazi regalia whilst teaching migrants.
Well, some people are just odd. He may have actually collected Nazi material because he was interested in studying it, from the point of view of say, avoiding it.
I've read some holocaust denial stuff. (Don't own any mind) and read things to understand the arguments of others.
On the other hand he could just have been mentally ill.
As a Times subscriber I am dismayed that the paper has endorsed Remain subject to no return to business as usual in the EU. Honestly, how utterly naïve can you get?
It is what most of their readers really want that is why
They back Remain but that is what their ideal EU would look like is what I mean
has anyone here has a serious mental illness and come through it? For me it feels like I'm stuck with it.
Yes, I had a year of my life effectively wasted by PTSD after being the victim of a violent crime. That was a long time ago now, and I would count myself as essentially entirely unscathed at this point, though I suppose one could say it put my life permanently one year "behind schedule." (Since it happened in my youth, I might even be tempted to trade it in - should The Fates ever grant the possibility - for the whole thing not to have happened, in exchange for a year knocked off the end of my life instead... might save me a brush with dementia to boot!)
Even if you aren't all that good at looking on the bright side, it's worth persevering in the knowledge that there actually is a bright side.
Sorry to hear you feel so burdened. Other than the above, the best I can suggest is stick to doing what your health professionals tell you! There's usually some reason to it.
The Times: what idiotic hand wringing. A dismal return to business as usual is exactly what we'll get with Remain and the Referendum will have resolved nothing.
If the EU was going to "reform" they'd have done in when they had a fantastic opportunity to "reform" AKA Cameron's non-negotiation renegotiation.
The British government/political class (from Cameron down) have absolutely no desire to see the EU "reform". In fact they're all signed up to more "integration" whenever they think they can get away with it.
So of course it will back to "business as usual". Actually it will be worse than business as usual because we'll be forever locked in to the ever expanding superstate (the political class will not dare have another referendum after these past weeks you can be sure of that)
Now, business as usual short term, and long term submergence into the Superstate is a perfectly legitimate position for the UK to be in but people should at least be honest about, not delude themselves they are voting for REMAIN but they'll be an on-going process of "reform" and other opportunities to LEAVE. It's a non-starter.
The thing that really irritates me is that, knowing that the EU was never going to reform, why didn't he instead negotiate a change in the UK's relationship with (that unchanging) EU?
Why didn't he try and get something like, oh I don't know, a Special Status, carving us out of the whole EU ever closer union superstate bandwagon so that it could carry on with its superstate thing but we could say: "Non!", and just enjoy the stuff that we like, the single market, that sort of thing.
BUT WAIT!
That's just what he did do.
Actually he didn't.
He got a bit of a preamble not important to the treaty removed from the treaty. Also he didn't get anything on anything else.
seems perfectly reasonable to me, the Times piece. We are part of the European family. We might think our family could do with changing, but we don't leave them in a fit of petulance
Is that another way if saying You Agree With Rupert?
I'm not on Twitter or other social media, but having clicked on the General Boles link below, I had to laugh at the retweet from Angela Eagle. Asked why she supports the most corrupt, undemocratic organisation in the world, she replies 'I don't support Fifa'. Fair play, that's a good one.
That's quality. I don't like her as a politician but that's a very good gag by MP standards
As a Times subscriber I am dismayed that the paper has endorsed Remain subject to no return to business as usual in the EU. Honestly, how utterly naïve can you get?
It is what most of their readers really want that is why
They back Remain but that is what their ideal EU would look like is what I mean
As a Times subscriber I am dismayed that the paper has endorsed Remain subject to no return to business as usual in the EU. Honestly, how utterly naïve can you get?
It is what most of their readers really want that is why
They back Remain but that is what their ideal EU would look like is what I mean
Something very odd about that article, the bloke was collecting Nazi regalia whilst teaching migrants.
Well, some people are just odd. He may have actually collected Nazi material because he was interested in studying it, from the point of view of say, avoiding it.
I've read some holocaust denial stuff. (Don't own any mind) and read things to understand the arguments of others.
On the other hand he could just have been mentally ill.
Exactly, "reports" of him shouting "Britain first" or something are neither here nor there, anybody portraying this as some sort of politically driven event is clutching at straws. Its an awful tragedy, so upsetting, but nothing to do with politics let alone the referendum, despite what some people appear to be hoping.
Something very odd about that article, the bloke was collecting Nazi regalia whilst teaching migrants.
Had mixed-race brother too. They got on fine...
You think this smells?
I think its odd, it seems every time somebody gets murdered the BBC crowbar "far right tendencies" into the story. The article is contradictory at best.
And before anybody gets excited I've already stated the killer should be executed.
It could be he collected the stuff a long time ago, for instance.
But you're right. He cunningly assembled the other 27 heads of state, agreed a deal, and then as soon as the poor suckers vote Remain, will hold up his "Bluff" sign and we'll all be using the euro by Christmas.
As I said before I strongly suspect you, like most other people, only read the single published document that was hailed by Cameron and not the other 5 that make up the whole agreement. You have singularly failed at every opportunity to answer any questions about the flaws in the deal so I will repeat what I have posted before.
A significant number of the measures need approval from the European Parliament and they have already made clear they oppose them. Others including the emergency brake on migration also need the approval of the individual Parliaments of the 28 nations. And even after that could be subject to challenge by the constitutional courts of those countries.
The measures to prevent the Eurozone from acting as a bloc only require the Council of Ministers to listen to objections by non-Eurozone countries. They do not require them to actually change anything. They can still proceed with measures detrimental to the non Eurozone countries as long as they can be shown to be necessary for the Eurozone and not simply proposed to place non Eurozone countries at a disadvantage. They can place non Eurozone countries at a disadvantage but that cannot be the only reason for the measure.
And your regular dismissal of the ECJ displays a terrible lack of understanding of its function and purpose. The ECj is not there to uphold decisions made by the national governments or the Council of Ministers or any other body. They are there to interpret the law in accordance with the EU treaties on behalf of the citizens of the EU. All it will take is one individual making a formal complaint to the ECJ and they will consider it their duty (indeed they are obligated by treaty) to make a ruling on the matter.
In case you forgot this already happened with the Working Time Directive opt out which was agreed by all members as part of the Maastricht Treaty and was then overturned a year or two later by the ECJ. They have a history of doing this.
As a Times subscriber I am dismayed that the paper has endorsed Remain subject to no return to business as usual in the EU. Honestly, how utterly naïve can you get?
It is what most of their readers really want that is why
They back Remain but that is what their ideal EU would look like is what I mean
We all have a view on an "ideal" EU.
But this vote should not be based on delusions.
In all fairness much of your supporters' votes are based on delusions. Yours isn't. But many millions will vote Leave on a false prospectus
The Times: what idiotic hand wringing. A dismal return to business as usual is exactly what we'll get with Remain and the Referendum will have resolved nothing.
If the EU was going to "reform" they'd have done in when they had a fantastic opportunity to "reform" AKA Cameron's non-negotiation renegotiation.
The British government/political class (from Cameron down) have absolutely no desire to see the EU "reform". In fact they're all signed up to more "integration" whenever they think they can get away with it.
So of course it will back to "business as usual". Actually it will be worse than business as usual because we'll be forever locked in to the ever expanding superstate (the political class will not dare have another referendum after these past weeks you can be sure of that)
Now, business as usual short term, and long term submergence into the Superstate is a perfectly legitimate position for the UK to be in but people should at least be honest about, not delude themselves they are voting for REMAIN but they'll be an on-going process of "reform" and other opportunities to LEAVE. It's a non-starter.
The thing that really irritates me is that, knowing that the EU was never going to reform, why didn't he instead negotiate a change in the UK's relationship with (that unchanging) EU?
Why didn't he try and get something like, oh I don't know, a Special Status, carving us out of the whole EU ever closer union superstate bandwagon so that it could carry on with its superstate thing but we could say: "Non!", and just enjoy the stuff that we like, the single market, that sort of thing.
BUT WAIT!
That's just what he did do.
Actually he didn't.
He got a bit of a preamble not important to the treaty removed from the treaty. Also he didn't get anything on anything else.
Agreement from 28 EU heads of state = didn't get anything.
So the papers have leant nothing since that Bristol case. Press regulation needed I'm afraid.
Heh. All the efforts to stop demonising mental health issues and encouraging people to seek help and now this. *golf clap* . Sun shows its utter lack of class.
We are part of the European family. We might think our family could do with changing, but we don't leave them in a fit of petulance
More like your housemates. It started off with sharing the rent, but now everybody's pooling money for everything from foods to night out. Because we spend more time at work, we end up putting money into the pot to subsidise the other members. We didn't go on the big holiday they took a few years back, but a couple of the housemates ran up some serious credit card debts. Since then they've been making noises about everybody chipping in to cover them up, and then appointing one member of the household to scrutinise everybody's finances to make sure it doesn't happen again. They've promised it won't apply to us, but we haven't got anything in writing and they seem disturbingly reluctant to provide us with it.
Everybody in the house has a little bit in common, but we've got plenty of friends outside while the rest only really seem interested in hanging out together. Frankly, it's starting to seem like a cult. So we've got two choices: stay in there, and hope we can change their minds despite never really having managed to do so in the past. Or move out, even though there's a chance we might be couch-surfing for a while, and hope that either one or two of the sensible members come after us or it snaps the rest of them out of their delusions.
What are we going to do with all that sovereignty when we win? I propose banishing the FT to Frankfurt.
I think you will find that they need access to our money markets more than our money markets need access to them. That is why London trade more $s than New York and China came to London as well.
Why do you think I make that proposal?
Sorry..., I'll reread you post...
Banning the Financial Times to Frankfurt... Makes sense now.
But you're right. He cunningly assembled the other 27 heads of state, agreed a deal, and then as soon as the poor suckers vote Remain, will hold up his "Bluff" sign and we'll all be using the euro by Christmas.
As I said before I strongly suspect you, like most other people, only read the single published document that was hailed by Cameron and not the other 5 that make up the whole agreement. You have singularly failed at every opportunity to answer any questions about the flaws in the deal so I will repeat what I have posted before.
A significant number of the measures need approval from the European Parliament and they have already made clear they oppose them. Others including the emergency brake on migration also need the approval of the individual Parliaments of the 28 nations. And even after that could be subject to challenge by the constitutional courts of those countries.
The measures to prevent the Eurozone from acting as a bloc only require the Council of Ministers to listen to objections by non-Eurozone countries. They do not require them to actually change anything. They can still proceed with measures detrimental to the non Eurozone countries as long as they can be shown to be necessary for the Eurozone and not simply proposed to place non Eurozone countries at a disadvantage. They can place non Eurozone countries at a disadvantage but that cannot be the only reason for the measure.
And your regular dismissal of the ECJ displays a terrible lack of understanding of its function and purpose. The ECj is not there to uphold decisions made by the national governments or the Council of Ministers or any other body. They are there to interpret the law in accordance with the EU treaties on behalf of the citizens of the EU. All it will take is one individual making a formal complaint to the ECJ and they will consider it their duty (indeed they are obligated by treaty) to make a ruling on the matter.
In case you forgot this already happened with the Working Time Directive opt out which was agreed by all members as part of the Maastricht Treaty and was then overturned a year or two later by the ECJ. They have a history of doing this.
Is it the same "emergency brake" that you expect to sail through once we are members of EEA/EFTA?
As a Times subscriber I am dismayed that the paper has endorsed Remain subject to no return to business as usual in the EU. Honestly, how utterly naïve can you get?
It is what most of their readers really want that is why
They back Remain but that is what their ideal EU would look like is what I mean
We all have a view on an "ideal" EU.
But this vote should not be based on delusions.
In all fairness much of your supporters' votes are based on delusions. Yours isn't. But many millions will vote Leave on a false prospectus
or vote Leave as a protest against the status quo....
As this Lib Dem (along with a small but significant minority) will be voting LEAVE, I'm not sure all the sad old stereotypes of LDs being Europhiles has anything other than trolling value.
It's also worth reminding some on here Nick Clegg might have supported AV but it has never been Lib Dem policy and I voted NO as did, I suspect, a number of LDs.
Back to more immediate matters, out walking with Mrs Stodge this evening and discussing the EU Referendum (she's a LEAVE supporter too which helps domestic harmony no end). It occurred to me that in trying to finally put an end to a question which has afflicted the Conservative Party for 30 years, David Cameron unwittingly raised a question which has bothered many in Britain for sixty years.
A referendum on the EU has been replaced by a referendum on immigration.
This LD voted against AV. It is a pretty crap system, but I would have voted for a good PR system with constituency links (like in Scotland and Wales). I will be voting Remain. No party is a monolith (bizarrely polls show 5% of kippers voting Remain. It is quite hard to know why!)
It is turning into a referendum on immigration though.
Anecdote: today I was interviewing a Greek Doctor for a post. We got to the mandatory HR questions at the end that get asked of all candidates. One was "Do you need a work Visa?" He smiled and said "Not this week". Droll enough to make dry jokes in interviews? Give him the job!
Oh how we will laugh when the immigration police haul him out of clinic and on a plane to Athens in handcuffs!
Ah.. Greek doctors looking for work here! Isn't the way the Euro has destroyed the Greek health system just fantastic?
Greece has long been a net exporter of Doctors. Greece trains twice as many per capita than we do:
Go in any hospital in Germany, UK or USA and you will find Greek trained doctors.
The fellow today has a wife with a decent job in Greece, and a private practice that he can live comfortably on. He wants to come here to stretch himself professionally, pick up new skills then return back. He likes the collegiate way that the NHS works.
seems perfectly reasonable to me, the Times piece. We are part of the European family. We might think our family could do with changing, but we don't leave them in a fit of petulance
This is an extremely poor analogy. Nation states are not in families. We have interests. Those interests drive our diplomatic stance with other nation states who, in turn, have their own interests. Those interests, over time, may diverge.
For example it's now clear that the US is realigning its interests to the Pacific. That's their strategic imperative and it overrides most considerations of the 'special relationship' (which is itself defined by the 1948 UKUSA agreement).
We should certainly seek friendly relations with our trading partners. But not at the expense of our national interest.
But you're right. He cunningly assembled the other 27 heads of state, agreed a deal, and then as soon as the poor suckers vote Remain, will hold up his "Bluff" sign and we'll all be using the euro by Christmas.
As I said before I strongly suspect you, like most other people, only read the single published document that was hailed by Cameron and not the other 5 that make up the whole agreement. You have singularly failed at every opportunity to answer any questions about the flaws in the deal so I will repeat what I have posted before.
A significant number of the measures need approval from the European Parliament and they have already made clear they oppose them. Others including the emergency brake on migration also need the approval of the individual Parliaments of the 28 nations. And even after that could be subject to challenge by the constitutional courts of those countries.
The measures to prevent the Eurozone from acting as a bloc only require the Council of Ministers to listen to objections by non-Eurozone countries. They do not require them to actually change anything. They can still proceed with measures detrimental to the non Eurozone countries as long as they can be shown to be necessary for the Eurozone and not simply proposed to place non Eurozone countries at a disadvantage. They can place non Eurozone countries at a disadvantage but that cannot be the only reason for the measure.
And your regular dismissal of the ECJ duty (indeed they are obligated by treaty) to make a ruling on the matter.
In case you forgot this already happened with the Working Time Directive opt out which was agreed by all members as part of the Maastricht Treaty and was then overturned a year or two later by the ECJ. They have a history of doing this.
Oh and as for all the other bolleaux you spout. When Mikey Gove came onto the radiowaves to explain how the ECJ might strike down the deal, apart from being a cheeky monkey, he was being shall we say creative. A thousand legal experts, one of which you are not, came on straight afterwards and said that the man is a cretin (they were of course far too polite to phrase it thus).
As for the eurozone. I am struggling to see how we have better protection from the eurozone countries ganging up on us outside the EU than inside it. As we ALL KNOW, the precedent has been set in the ECJ with their opinion on the ECB's Location Policy. We won inside. Would we win outside? Not so sure.
So in total, although you have written a lot of words, 99.9% of it is sheer wishful thinking bollocks.
Something very odd about that article, the bloke was collecting Nazi regalia whilst teaching migrants.
Had mixed-race brother too. They got on fine...
You think this smells?
I think its odd, it seems every time somebody gets murdered the BBC crowbar "far right tendencies" into the story. The article is contradictory at best.
And before anybody gets excited I've already stated the killer should be executed.
But you're right. He cunningly assembled the other 27 heads of state, agreed a deal, and then as soon as the poor suckers vote Remain, will hold up his "Bluff" sign and we'll all be using the euro by Christmas.
As I said before I strongly suspect you, like most other people, only read the single published document that was hailed by Cameron and not the other 5 that make up the whole agreement. You have singularly failed at every opportunity to answer any questions about the flaws in the deal so I will repeat what I have posted before.
A significant number of the measures need approval from the European Parliament and they have already made clear they oppose them. Others including the emergency brake on migration also need the approval of the individual Parliaments of the 28 nations. And even after that could be subject to challenge by the constitutional courts of those countries.
The measures to prevent the Eurozone from acting as a bloc only require the Council of Ministers to listen to objections by non-Eurozone countries. They do not require them to actually change anything. They can still proceed with measures detrimental to the non Eurozone countries as long as they can be shown to be necessary for the Eurozone and not simply proposed to place non Eurozone countries at a disadvantage. They can place non Eurozone countries at a disadvantage but that cannot be the only reason for the measure.
And your regular dismissal of the ECJ displays a terrible lack of understanding of its function and purpose. The ECj is not there to uphold decisions made by the national governments or the Council of Ministers or any other body. They are there to interpret the law in accordance with the EU treaties on behalf of the citizens of the EU. All it will take is one individual making a formal complaint to the ECJ and they will consider it their duty (indeed they are obligated by treaty) to make a ruling on the matter.
In case you forgot this already happened with the Working Time Directive opt out which was agreed by all members as part of the Maastricht Treaty and was then overturned a year or two later by the ECJ. They have a history of doing this.
Is it the same "emergency brake" that you expect to sail through once we are members of EEA/EFTA?
Personally I'd say sod 'em all and go WTO if they won't play ball. Cameron was an idiot in his negotiating technique. Never believed he had any muscle behind his "threat" ( ho ho ) to leave. How wrong he was. If he'd backed leave it would've been a walkover. I suspect he never remotely believed that.
Something very odd about that article, the bloke was collecting Nazi regalia whilst teaching migrants.
Had mixed-race brother too. They got on fine...
You think this smells?
FWIW I've heard that the mental health programme he was on was shut down last year & he blamed it on the MP.
That would not fit with what three witnesses so far recorded him as saying, however.
??????? I'm puzzled I must say. It's quite possible he saw cuts to the programme he was on and then you have an MP who takes a high profile role saying we can help refugees.
Comments
Maybe it's a clever bit of reverse psychology, which they know their readers are smart enough to get.
Why didn't he try and get something like, oh I don't know, a Special Status, carving us out of the whole EU ever closer union superstate bandwagon so that it could carry on with its superstate thing but we could say: "Non!", and just enjoy the stuff that we like, the single market, that sort of thing.
BUT WAIT!
That's just what he did do.
This murder does raise issues of access to mental health services, but also does risk stigmatising the mentally ill. Clinical mental illness is quite common with 1/9 men and 1/6 women being treated for it at some point in their life. Blaming mental illness for this killing is something that is a bit too simplistic. He may have had quite different motivations for the attack, as yet unrevealed. Breivik was judged sane as were the killers of Lee Rigby, as indeed are most more prosaic killers. It is very possible that he is "bad rather than mad" in the sense of culpability.
Was he of sufficiently sound mind at the time of the killing to understand the consequences of his actions? This will be an issue for the courts to decide. You remove a persons dignity and existence as a free thinking individual by assuming too glibly his insanity.
Your problem is poor maintenance of printing facilities so they break down a lot? Have you tried not printing things.
Yes, that might be a good thing as well, cost saving, but it is not actually a solution to the problem raised.
Your problem, and that of some others in Europe is too much power going to the EU? How about we be more efficient?
Yes, that would be a good thing as well. But it doesn't address the problem I raised.
It is not true, finally, that Brexit would answer at a stroke the prayers of those Vote Leave is wooing. This is especially so in Labour strongholds where most social problems predate the EU’s expansion and most immigration is from outside Europe.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/remaking-europe-h7lcgs8bw
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/donald-trump-unfavorable-polls-224454
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/06/17/exclusive-poll-eu-support-falls-after-jo-cox-murder/86031038/
It turns out someone had to check the effect of a murder.
Having explained it here a thousand times, and to save every other poster's sanity, I am not going to tell you why it would be. You can google stuff.
Here's a hint ( @Cyclefree look away now).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11271216/UK-has-fewer-doctors-than-almost-every-EU-country.html
Go in any hospital in Germany, UK or USA and you will find Greek trained doctors.
The fellow today has a wife with a decent job in Greece, and a private practice that he can live comfortably on. He wants to come here to stretch himself professionally, pick up new skills then return back. He likes the collegiate way that the NHS works.
I wonder if Murdoch has changed his view on what The Sun should be? He's always liked to back the winner before but I suspect with the anti-establishment mood around now he might want the currant bun to be 'the people's voice' holding the great and the good's feet to the fire.
Let's just say that many of us are unconvinced that anything other than treaty change would hold up under a challenge from the ECJ, and there is an additional small risk that the EU parliament would prove difficult. The optics of managing a Remain vote should the EU fail to honour Cameron's agreement would be extremely challenging.
But you're right. He cunningly assembled the other 27 heads of state, agreed a deal, and then as soon as the poor suckers vote Remain, will hold up his "Bluff" sign and we'll all be using the euro by Christmas.
And before anybody gets excited I've already stated the killer should be executed.
"I felt it was right at the time," the former head of the armed forces says of the decision to attack Saddam to stop him attacking us. "Now I'm not so sure. In fact I think it was probably wrong."
independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/lord-guthrie-tonys-general-turns-defence-into-an-attack-399865.html
That Lord "Nostradamus" Guthrie?
I've read some holocaust denial stuff. (Don't own any mind) and read things to understand the arguments of others.
On the other hand he could just have been mentally ill.
Without giving away too much detail, the answer to your question is yes.
*I accept this may be seen as an incentive to continue
Even if you aren't all that good at looking on the bright side, it's worth persevering in the knowledge that there actually is a bright side.
Sorry to hear you feel so burdened. Other than the above, the best I can suggest is stick to doing what your health professionals tell you! There's usually some reason to it.
He got a bit of a preamble not important to the treaty removed from the treaty. Also he didn't get anything on anything else.
But this vote should not be based on delusions.
The police can have as much time as it takes, as far as I am concerned.
Grim though the present situation is, mistaken or contested claims by the police could make it still worse.
This was not about gardening
A significant number of the measures need approval from the European Parliament and they have already made clear they oppose them. Others including the emergency brake on migration also need the approval of the individual Parliaments of the 28 nations. And even after that could be subject to challenge by the constitutional courts of those countries.
The measures to prevent the Eurozone from acting as a bloc only require the Council of Ministers to listen to objections by non-Eurozone countries. They do not require them to actually change anything. They can still proceed with measures detrimental to the non Eurozone countries as long as they can be shown to be necessary for the Eurozone and not simply proposed to place non Eurozone countries at a disadvantage. They can place non Eurozone countries at a disadvantage but that cannot be the only reason for the measure.
And your regular dismissal of the ECJ displays a terrible lack of understanding of its function and purpose. The ECj is not there to uphold decisions made by the national governments or the Council of Ministers or any other body. They are there to interpret the law in accordance with the EU treaties on behalf of the citizens of the EU. All it will take is one individual making a formal complaint to the ECJ and they will consider it their duty (indeed they are obligated by treaty) to make a ruling on the matter.
In case you forgot this already happened with the Working Time Directive opt out which was agreed by all members as part of the Maastricht Treaty and was then overturned a year or two later by the ECJ. They have a history of doing this.
K
Everybody in the house has a little bit in common, but we've got plenty of friends outside while the rest only really seem interested in hanging out together. Frankly, it's starting to seem like a cult. So we've got two choices: stay in there, and hope we can change their minds despite never really having managed to do so in the past. Or move out, even though there's a chance we might be couch-surfing for a while, and hope that either one or two of the sensible members come after us or it snaps the rest of them out of their delusions.
Banning the Financial Times to Frankfurt... Makes sense now.
The guy was ill - all his family agreed - he had even sought treatment the night before...
They resolutely say he never talked politics, and showed no signs of racism. His mixed-race brother is flabbergasted.
The only 'political' link seems to be some mail order stuff he allegedly ordered from a defunct rightist group in the US thirteen years ago...
For example it's now clear that the US is realigning its interests to the Pacific. That's their strategic imperative and it overrides most considerations of the 'special relationship' (which is itself defined by the 1948 UKUSA agreement).
We should certainly seek friendly relations with our trading partners. But not at the expense of our national interest.
As for the eurozone. I am struggling to see how we have better protection from the eurozone countries ganging up on us outside the EU than inside it. As we ALL KNOW, the precedent has been set in the ECJ with their opinion on the ECB's Location Policy. We won inside. Would we win outside? Not so sure.
So in total, although you have written a lot of words, 99.9% of it is sheer wishful thinking bollocks.
;-)
(And if you think that is an atrocious thing to say - it is - and statements like mine come out of the mouths of left-wing extremists every day.)