Brexit

Where no two people are likely to agree.
User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10773
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Brexit

Post by Poodle » Mon Mar 11, 2019 3:35 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:
Mon Mar 11, 2019 1:03 pm
Poodle, you are just wrong there:
I assume you are talking about sensor grids, cameras etc., but in the case of NI/I, those would have to go through people's gardens.
There is no space to put any kind of staggered barrier - even a physical one will be hard to erect again.

The UK wants the pie and eat it, which is just not possible.
It ain't wrong, EM. There was once a time before the EU existed and, during that time, the only signs (and very unprepossessing signs) of a border sat only upon major roads. During the troubles there were 'mobile' borders which consisted of barbed wire strung across a trouble spot entry/exit point, but they went out of use upon the agreement of the Peace Accord - and, even so, some of those troubles happened when the UK and the RoI were full EU members. I've mentioned the nature of that border on this thread before, and I'd challenge anyone in the entire world to construct anything like an exclusive zone along its length. It ain't physically possible. To get from A to B anywhere along that border, there will be a hundred optional routes.
So - who are we talking about? Seamus and Pat who take a few cigarettes and a couple of bottles down a shallow creek and across a foggy field, or Seamus and Pat who drive a juggernaut which can't take the moonlit route? Anyone who tells you that the juggernaut cannot be controlled without a physical barrier at the point of crossing is lying to you.
EDIT: It would, I suppose, be nice to have and eat the pie - for either side in this negotiation. However, the only pie on offer is the £39 billion from the UK should the UK go over the time allowed for Brexit. Who gets to eat that if there is some kind of agreement? It's certainly not the UK - and it's not a pie if there's no agreement, as it's UK money in the first place.

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 496
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Brexit

Post by Goody67 » Mon Mar 11, 2019 3:49 pm

Upton_O_Goode wrote:
Sun Mar 10, 2019 7:50 pm
Of course it is. Individual people have different levels of tolerance. What's the point?
The point is that not everyone will agree with your statement.
Yeah. Once again, SO WHAT??? I didn't state or imply anything different from what you are saying here. All I did was give my own (SUBJECTIVE!) impression of what the limit might be. It's also true that the Obama administration had been rolling back the number of Mexicans living illegally in the United States for the eight years previous to the Trump presidency. The issue wasn't a major one until Trump whipped up a hysteria about it in order to get elected. The problem was being handled.
You didn't give a 'limit', you just said that it has not 'exceeded'.

Trump didn't need to hype anything up, the Mexicans and Islamic fundamentalists did that themselves. He simply stated what thousands upon thousands of ordinary Americans were thinking to themselves.

How was the problem being "handled"?
Of course, that's the issue. But it's one thing to do it in a climate of rationality, and quite another in a climate of rage stimulated by a demagogue.
I noticed you dodged my question, "How many more?"
Where does this question come from? Why do you rhetorically imply that I've never thought about this? You don't know me.
You are right, I don't know you. But, like others, you seem to be hell-bent on pushing arguments for immigration whilst ignoring the problems that it would cause for the natives of a country, in this case, America.
Of COURSE there isn't...yet! As Benjamin Franklin said, "It is best to take alarm at the FIRST attempt on our liberties." The Trump Administration has in every way encouraged bigotry against Muslims. Trump knows the buttons to push. Of course, he's not going to come out and say (as Nazi propaganda did) that Muslims are a poison in the system. He doesn't have to. There are plenty of his followers to do that, especially among evangelical Christians. The road to hell is one that curves very gradually, so that it looks reasonably straight at any given point. But the base has been laid down. There is now a solid layer of anti-Muslim hatred all through the country.
Jimmy Swaggart wrote: You know what we ought to do? We ought to take every single Muslim student in every college in this nation and ship them back to where they came from.
There never will be, it is utter hogwash. You consider Trump and his administration to be "demagogues", yet, you are trying to equate Trump's Presidency to eventually mirror the Third Reich. :? How do you expect people to take you seriously? :|

There is a distinction between Islam and Muslims. Trump, and many others, have highlighted the problems of Islam and the way some Muslims behave in America, Australia, UK, Germany, Austria, etc. I shall never understand why it's all of a sudden considered by some to be hateful to criticise a religion that is totally incompatible with the basic values of America, UK, etc. Shall we just bow down and allow this foreign religion to gradually take over everything?

Shall I cherry-pick quotations from self-proclaimed socialists and Marxists and then equate those to how every single socialist or Marxist thinks? It's ridiculous to think that most Trump supporters think the way Swaggart thinks. Nevertheless, Swaggart is entitled to his opinion.

I have seen no evidence that most Trump supporters want to deport all Muslims from the US.
But if Muslims are a bad example, consider also LBGT people, another minority with no real power, which Trump despises and does everything he can legally do to torment them. They also are a target of his mindless evangelical followers. Obviously, it isn't too bad...yet! But we need to stay on top of it.
Ah right, so if he does anything that is not seen as "progressive" then he's a terrible person! :? Why do LGBT people need "power"? The LGBT "community" is a grouping of different people based on their sexuality, nothing more.

Anyone who doesn't agree with the LGBT community is then seen as an enemy and is targeted by the people of LGBT community and supporters. Similarly, anyone who disagrees with the BS concepts such as 'non-binary' and 'gender-fluid' is then labeled as transphobic , homophobic, etc.
(Parenthetically, I also enjoy reading your posts and am grateful to you for aiding me in my attempt to learn more about the Holocaust. So, I hope we can keep this debate from getting too acrimonious. Whatever you care to reply, I feel that, with this post, I will have said my piece and will shut up and let you have the last word.)
I try my best to never get personal. My responses to you are not about striving to get the last word. On the contrary, I enjoy a good debate.
If you are referring to Islamic terrorists, I'm not naïve. We need to vet people very carefully for any signs of terrorist connections. But we were already doing that quite effectively when Obama was president. We didn't need a President who whips up fear of terrorists.
I was referring specifically to Islamic books. Have you read the Quran or the Hadith?

Trump didn't need to fear any hysteria about terrorists, a lot has changed since Obama's Presidency and Trump's Presidency; the terrorists did enough themselves.
Yes, that's all he literally SAID. But look at what his evangelical supporters say about them. And, again, he tried to impose a blanket ban on all people from predominantly Muslim countries (except, ironically, the ones who came from select countries, including the one that furnished the 9/11 terrorists).
Trump is trying his best to solve the problem of Islamic extremism. There is an ongoing problem and it needs to be solved.
It's quite easy to tell. Some years ago, when these women walked down the street, they attracted stares. I noticed those stares. Nowadays, they don't attract stares. It's become routine to see them on the street.
Am I right in making the assumption that you lean towards left-wing politics? If so, this may be why you don't see many people staring because of that kind tend to not give a toss and welcome the concepts of 'refugees welcome' and 'open borders' (not all do, but a good percentage do). I think if you were to ask just ordinary citizens getting on with their lives then you would get different answers.
Talking to my neighbors and talking to the newcomers.
Well they aren't going to show any sort of negative feelings in the presence of people making them feel "welcome".
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 496
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Brexit

Post by Goody67 » Mon Mar 11, 2019 4:08 pm

Upton_O_Goode wrote:
Mon Mar 11, 2019 11:23 am
Yes, I recognize that many people will consider me alarmist about the anti-Muslim propaganda being disseminated right now. I'm guided by the fact that that WAS the first step in the Nazi program: Get the word out that the Jews are poisonous vermin. It MAY not go beyond that in the US. I hope not, but I'd rather try to deal with it now than later, when some gun-toting vigilantes start shooting at peaceful Muslims. The slant of the Trump administration is very clear: They decry ANY violence committed BY black people, especially against the police, but Trump has never, even once, expressed any outrage over the many attacks on Muslims that take place all over the country, as well as the many minor attempts at harassment of them. (In Arkansas, locals purchased all the land around a mosque and filled it with pigs. Just one example.)
Shall I start comparing Corbyn or Sanders as Stalin or Chairman Mao? Of course not.

I don't mean to be personal, but in my opinion you are misguided rather than guided by anything (I apologise if this comes as an ad hominem, I can assure you that I am not meaning to personally attack you, I just couldn't think of a better way to explain my response to what you posted - I hope there are no hard feelings between us). There is a reason why no serious scholar or academic would make the claim that Trump's Presidency is turning into a mirror of the Third Reich. Why? Because it's BS.
I gather you don't like diversity as much as I do.
Most people do not. Why? Because most people prefer others to be of the same race, culture, values, laws, etc.

I always thought that true 'diversity' is appreciating the different races, cultures, etc, not by trying to have all of those in one melting pot. Multiracialism and multiculturalism do not work - there is not a single country in the world which can be used as a good example of where both of those concepts have worked properly.
Well, OK, but unless you are willing to vet people by asking them what their religion is and making laws that explicitly deny rights to members of certain religions, the program you espouse is unworkable. You speak of "inviting" people into the country. We aren't going out and advertising to get Muslims to come here, but we (like ALL countries) do accept immigrants. At least we USED to; if Trump and his nativist supporters have their way, we'll pull the ladder up on that. And if you think his evangelical supporters hate only Muslims, think again: They'd like to require a belief in God as a condition of having any civil rights. There was a time, just after the Civil War, when various states tried to arrest Robert Ingersoll for going around and lecturing on agnosticism. They'd still like to REQUIRE the teaching of creationism in high-school science classes.
Some religions are much more troublesome than others. I don't recall ever reading about Buddhists or Hindus blowing up buildings in the name of their religion. Although religion is a personal choice, I do believe that someone's religion should be taken into account when vetting the person. The problem isn't someone's religion per se, but the problem occurs when a large number of people believing in the same religion begin a gradual process of overtaking in various ways.

What is your source that his evangelical supporters wish that a belief in God to be requirement for being entitled to civil rights?

The sooner creationism and other such nonsense is removed from schools (or any forms of education), the better. On this subject, are you aware of what Muslim teachers and scholars are teaching young Muslims?
All this, as I said, is unworkable: Making certain beliefs (or their absence) a requirement for admission to the country simply won't keep out any terrorists. Anybody can SAY they hold the right beliefs in order to get into the country. And some of the terrorists are already here, native-born Americans recruited over the Internet.
Making requirements that include restrictions will certainly lower the amount of terrorists being allowed into a country. I don't think that just simply stating a specific religion is enough, the person's background, connections, etc, should all be questioned and looked into as well.

With regards to natives and the internet, you are right, both are ongoing problems.
I won't argue that Islamic values are basically peaceful. There's too much in the Quran that contradicts that position, and I think it's a horrible religion. But what should our POLICY be? That's the question. We HAVE to co-exist with Islam. Right now, that's not the direction we are going. We're engaged in dozens of countries, multiplying our enemies among the Muslims of the world, in a futile effort to kill ALL of the ones who hate us. That's the strategy that didn't work in Viet Nam, and it's not going to work any better on a global scale.
Muslims should not try and enforce their values and ways of life onto other people.

Why do we have to co-exist with Islam? It's incompatible with our very basic human rights. It seems you are bowing to a religion which despises you as a non-believer, why?

Good, I am glad that we are not co-existing with Islam. I don't want to co-exist with any religion or belief that is against everything I believe.

"Kill"? No. People just want to feel safe in their own country.
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 496
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Brexit

Post by Goody67 » Mon Mar 11, 2019 4:14 pm



A longer video of Powell speaking about Britain's member of the EEC.

The full transcript:
Day: Mr Powell, there wasn’t much point in advising people to vote Labour from the point of view of staying in or coming out of the Common Market, was there?

Powell: I’m always in favour of a question being reopened as important as this. It has been reopened and now we have a provisional result which takes us on to the next stage.

Day: Why do you say “a provisional result”, and what is the next stage?

Powell: Oh, I’m just replying on the Government’s official statement.

Day: Can I read it for you? “Our continued membership will depend on the continuing assent of Parliament”

Powell: Yes, that’s the one. And since Parliament will be continuously re-elected by the electorate, then this is an ongoing debate.

Day: Yes, but with respect Mr Powell, you have picked out one sentence from a passage which deals with the constitutional position…

Powell: Yes, that’s right.

Day: …and not with the practical position, because are you suggesting that from now on, you and others who feel like you should continue a parliamentary struggle to get Britain out?

Powell: But of course. This is like September 1938. In September, October 1938 I’m sure that, if Neville Chamberlain had gone to the country, he would have swept the country for an act of abnegation. But the very same people, within 12 months, when they saw behind the facade, when they penetrated to the realities, stood up to fight for the continued existence of our nation; and that’s what will happen.

Day: You’re saying that this is a kind of Munich?

Powell: Yes I am

Day: I see

Powell: You seem surprised!

Day: And when do you see our 1940 coming, when we stand alone?

Powell: Well, let’s have our 1939 first, when we decide we have to fight. You see, I simply do not believe, although I make no complain of the pro-marketers, particularly people like Edward Heath and Peter Kirk – they have been beyond criticism in that they have made it clear that to remain part of the Common Market is to renounce national status for Britain – they say the nation state is obsolete and we are to recognise it.

Day: Who are you going to get to support you in your continuing parliamentary struggle to get Britain out of the Common Market, Mr Powell?

Powell: Well, as the House of Commons, week by week, has to debate the consequences of being in the Common Market, it will, as it tends to do, filter through to wider and wider areas, that they were rightly told by people like Edward Heath, that this did indeed mean that they would become a province in a new state. Now I do not believe that when that is realised, that it will be assented to.

Day: I remember you two or three years ago, when you were still in the Conservative Party, at the Conservative Party conference in Brighton, predicting, with total conviction and certainty, that this country would not go into the Common Market. May I suggest to you that your prediction now is no more right than that one was?

Powell: You have two events, if I may say so, slightly confused. One was the Conservative Party conference where I said I would never assent to the act of abnegation involved in Britain joining the Common Market; and a meeting in East Ham in September 1971 when I said it will not happen. I am still convinced it will not happen. I am convinced that the people of this country cannot be absorbed into a European state.

Day: But you said we would not go into the Common Market, and we did go into the Common Market, and are not just as wrong now as you were then?

Powell: No sir, the British people do not mean it because they have still not been able to credit the implications of being in the Common Market. They still think they will be a nation. They still think they will govern and tax and legislate for themselves. They are mistaken. It’s not the fault of many of the pro-marketeers that they are mistaken, but it is the thing, so incredible to them, that I am not inclined to blame them overmuch. But they will learn.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/ar ... yond-grave

What a visionary, a great man who was way ahead of his time.
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5131
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: Brexit

Post by ElectricMonk » Mon Mar 11, 2019 4:24 pm

Poodle, I don't think a border can be controlled, psychically or otherwise, especially not in a country with a huge coastline.
But the Brexiteers want border controls, which means bottlenecks, which means barriers. They want to be able to see the passport of everyone arriving.
How would that work in Northern Ireland?
The only way would be to check passports on the ferry to Liverpool which would be the equivalent of a border within the UK, exactly what the Brexiteers reject, too.
The Pie is a Lie.

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10889
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Brexit

Post by landrew » Mon Mar 11, 2019 4:54 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:
Mon Mar 11, 2019 4:24 pm
Poodle, I don't think a border can be controlled, psychically or otherwise, especially not in a country with a huge coastline.
But the Brexiteers want border controls, which means bottlenecks, which means barriers. They want to be able to see the passport of everyone arriving.
How would that work in Northern Ireland?
The only way would be to check passports on the ferry to Liverpool which would be the equivalent of a border within the UK, exactly what the Brexiteers reject, too.
The Pie is a Lie.
The blockhouses at the border crossings between Ireland and Northern Ireland are mostly still there, run down and derelict from being closed down in the Good Friday Agreement of 1998.

With a bit of soap, a few nails and some rat poison, I'm sure they could be put right with a modest renovation budget.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 496
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Brexit

Post by Goody67 » Mon Mar 11, 2019 5:14 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:
Mon Mar 11, 2019 4:24 pm
Poodle, I don't think a border can be controlled, psychically or otherwise, especially not in a country with a huge coastline.
But the Brexiteers want border controls, which means bottlenecks, which means barriers. They want to be able to see the passport of everyone arriving.
How would that work in Northern Ireland?
The only way would be to check passports on the ferry to Liverpool which would be the equivalent of a border within the UK, exactly what the Brexiteers reject, too.
The Pie is a Lie.
Why can't a border be controlled? :?

What are you suggesting? Should Britain have no border controls?

Yes, I do want to see the passport of everyone arriving, what is wrong with that?

How the border will be controlled is to be negotiated between the UK and the EU, no one knows yet.
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

User avatar
Austin Harper
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5514
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:22 pm
Custom Title: Rock Chalk Astrohawk
Location: Detroit

Re: Brexit

Post by Austin Harper » Mon Mar 11, 2019 5:32 pm

Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5131
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: Brexit

Post by ElectricMonk » Mon Mar 11, 2019 5:38 pm

What I'm saying is that the UK gains nothing in terms of security by severing ties with the EU. In fact, it makes matters much worse, since now on top of security, there will be a need for customs checks etc.
This will completely overwhelming entry points like Dover, making it necessary to weigh commerce against security.

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10773
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Brexit

Post by Poodle » Mon Mar 11, 2019 7:12 pm

The UK is not 'severing ties' with the EU - it is rescinding its membership of the EU. Europe will still be where it is now and so will the UK. There will be traffic going between the EU and the UK. There are no plans for the UK to deport people from the EU who happen to live here, and vice versa.
This is precisely the impression that the EU Commission has decided to convey - disagreement, strife, and punishment - and it's mostly BS. The Commission is decidedly NOT the EU. The UK is not attempting to grind the EU into dust and the EU (with the great exception of the over-inflated civil servants who make up the Commission) is not attempting to destroy the UK.
The UK is exercising its fully-legal rights in accordance with the definition of those rights contained within ALL EU documentation which concerns any of the legal rights of any member country. It's all perfectly sound and above board.
There's been a lot of hype given out, and the purpose of all the hype is to mislead and misinform. This is precisely why I often lose my rag with the Commission. There is probably a Tusk-ish place in Hell reserved for them, too.

But I still bought those seeds.

MikeN
Poster
Posts: 463
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2018 4:41 am

Re: Brexit

Post by MikeN » Mon Mar 11, 2019 7:57 pm

Upton, I saw a few years ago in Vermont, a pig sign was taken off a restaurant out of deference to Muslim sentiment. This is the sort of thing that happens if the Muslim population gets too high(though I doubt it was high in that Vermont place).
Britain is even worse, with police coming around to arrest you for Facebook postings.
Canada was like this, until Mark Steyn and his paper fought charges and managed to get the entire system of Human Rights Commissions repealed.


Goody, actually Trump's statement was only to halt Muslim immigration until 'our leaders can figure out what the hell is going on'.
It was an educated guess that there would be a terrorist attack between now and the election, and when it happens, voters will decide better to pick the guy who wants to ban Muslims.

My concern about Muslims isn't about weeding out terrorists. UK shows that many of the terrorists grew up in UK, did not immigrate there. The Muslim number has to stay small so they don't grow up in situations where they become radicalized. With Muslim birthrates, Germany may be doomed to becoming a sharia country, as parts of France and UK are right now. Many bars in certain parts of Netherlands have closed because alcohol is forbidden by Islam.

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10773
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Brexit

Post by Poodle » Mon Mar 11, 2019 8:46 pm

No part of the UK is under Sharia Law. Sharia Law has no legal basis in the UK. Sharia 'courts' are allowed but only as advisory bodies, and their pronouncements are not legally enforceable - in fact, anyone trying to enforce a Sharia judgment would be committing a criminal act.
Have I missed something? Is this make-up-a-fairy-story week?

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10889
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Brexit

Post by landrew » Mon Mar 11, 2019 8:59 pm

Sharia law was imposed in Canada:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/na ... cle743980/

But this is a half-truth, because it was banned shortly after.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

MikeN
Poster
Posts: 463
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2018 4:41 am

Re: Brexit

Post by MikeN » Mon Mar 11, 2019 9:19 pm

Poodle, the hate-crime investigations for saying bad things about Muslims is what I was counting as Sharia. There are also reports of 'no-go zones' in France and London and Brussels where the police don't interfere, and various Muslim patrols try to tell women what to wear. On another blog, one French lady, not Muslim, says she wears veils in certain parts of Paris for safety. There are some Muslim patrols in New York now. We will see what the effect is, and whether the media chooses to cover it.

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
Has No Life
Posts: 11961
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Brexit

Post by OlegTheBatty » Mon Mar 11, 2019 9:25 pm

MikeN wrote:
Mon Mar 11, 2019 7:57 pm

Canada was like this, until Mark Steyn and his paper fought charges and managed to get the entire system of Human Rights Commissions repealed.
No. Not even close.

Are you a self-appointed purveyor of BS, or is someone paying you?
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

.......................Doesn't matter how often I'm proved wrong.................... ~ bobbo the pragmatist

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10889
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Brexit

Post by landrew » Mon Mar 11, 2019 9:35 pm

I watched a video of someone who claimed to be muslim taking a copy of the book Satanic Verses around to people in a heavily muslim area of the UK, and asking their opinions. One man said he was a blasphemer for having the book, and it should be burned immediately. Later he came up from behind and snatched the book away presumably to burn it. The young man chased after him, and failed to catch him. I have to say, I fear for his safety.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 18923
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Brexit

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Mar 11, 2019 9:39 pm

Poodle wrote:
Mon Mar 11, 2019 8:46 pm
Sharia Law has no legal basis in the UK. Sharia 'courts' are allowed but only as advisory bodies,
Inherently contradictory. There is nothing to be enforced if people are cowed into following it. Thats the whole point.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Matthew Ellard
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 30516
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am
Custom Title: Big Beautiful Bouncy Skeptic

Re: Brexit

Post by Matthew Ellard » Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:03 am

MikeN wrote: There are also reports of 'no-go zones' in France and London and Brussels where the police don't interfere,
Name one of these areas in London.

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10773
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Brexit

Post by Poodle » Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:25 am

It is being reported - and I have seen no confirmation at all yet, but then it's only 05:21 here and the sun isn't up yet - that Mrs May succeeded yesterday in obtaining a unilaterally-triggerable limit to the backstop arrangements.
If that's so, then an orderly Brexit can be achieved with no further squabbling. As I've said - no confirmation yet.

EDIT: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47533666

EDIT2: So it appears to be true, although we still haven't seen the wording of any statement about it. Assuming it to be true, then we are now at the first junction of the flowchart I posted earlier and a sharp turn to the left (very short) side of it is on the cards. Once again, the really important decision will be the one taken by Arlene Foster and her DUP group in the House of Commons. If they decide that the proposed deal is now acceptable, then it's full steam ahead and most of that steam will be coming from Leo Varadkar's ears - Varadkar being the Irish leader whose demands are about to be overridden by the EU Commission.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 18923
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Brexit

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Mar 12, 2019 10:40 am

Holy Cow: just saw Katy Kay on Morning Joe. She said the Referendum offered up Three Years ago was done with the intent to "bring the people together." TELL ME THAT AIN'T SO????????? A referendum on anything important is just putting red and black ants into a jar and letting them fight it out. Referendums represent THE FAILURE of the governing body TO DO THEIR JOB!!!!

I see stupid people all around me.............................overseas too.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10773
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Brexit

Post by Poodle » Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:06 pm

OK Bobbo - it ain't so.
Definitely not so.

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10773
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Brexit

Post by Poodle » Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:12 pm

Our Attorney General has spoken ...

From the BBC ..."The risk of the UK being tied to EU rules after Brexit "remains unchanged" despite the latest changes to the PM's deal, the attorney general has said. Geoffrey Cox said there remained no "internationally lawful means" of leaving the Irish backstop without the EU's agreement."

So that's scuppered - there's no way the DUP will agree to it now. Tonight's vote is back up in the air and a no-deal Brexit is the front runner again.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 18923
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Brexit

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:44 pm

Poodle wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:06 pm
OK Bobbo - it ain't so.
Definitely not so.
Glad to hear it. I wonder what motivated her to say otherwise?.................................and as always............................ she's paid to say sumthing! Talking Heads.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10773
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Brexit

Post by Poodle » Tue Mar 12, 2019 6:15 pm

It's beyond me, bobbo. That particular referendum presented a binary choice. Please answer yes or no. That's sort of dividing the people up rather than bringing them together.

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 496
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Brexit

Post by Goody67 » Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:05 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:03 am
Name one of these areas in London.
Do you live in the UK? :? It seems strange that someone would even question that statement.

Even a policeman from London mentioned it.

https://www.lbc.co.uk/hot-topics/crime- ... eas-in-lo/

Only someone with their eyes closed would deny that there are areas in the UK, predominantly in London, in which non-Muslims are not welcome. It is not a myth to state that many British people do not feel safe in many areas of the UK due to the overrepresentation of Muslims.

Articles such as:

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and- ... -london-2/

Do not debunk the claim. There could be only 5% Muslim population in a place and the place could still be a no-go zone.
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

User avatar
Austin Harper
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5514
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:22 pm
Custom Title: Rock Chalk Astrohawk
Location: Detroit

Re: Brexit

Post by Austin Harper » Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:22 pm

That article quotes on anonymous man who claims to work for the police and claims his bosses told him not to go to parts of London, but doesn't specify where. That's because he either the man or the whole story is made up. As previously requested, please name which areas of London are no-go areas.
Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
Has No Life
Posts: 11961
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Brexit

Post by OlegTheBatty » Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:33 pm

If 5% Muslim population triggers a person to fear for their safety, they have the problem, not the community.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

.......................Doesn't matter how often I'm proved wrong.................... ~ bobbo the pragmatist

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 496
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Brexit

Post by Goody67 » Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:37 pm

Austin Harper wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:22 pm
That article quotes on anonymous man who claims to work for the police and claims his bosses told him not to go to parts of London, but doesn't specify where. That's because he either the man or the whole story is made up. As previously requested, please name which areas of London are no-go areas.
https://metro.co.uk/2018/02/05/fearless ... e-7288616/
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10773
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Brexit

Post by Poodle » Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:38 pm

A) There are absolutely zero no-go areas in London. Or in any other UK city, town or village. And no-go areas have sod all to do with Brexit. Please start another thread.
B) Theresa May has just lost the Parliamentary vote on her 'new deal' again by a huge number - not quite as big as the last time, but close enough. There will now be another vote tomorrow, presumably on whether a no-deal would be acceptable. I can safely predict that it wouldn't be.
Last edited by Poodle on Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 496
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Brexit

Post by Goody67 » Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:39 pm

OlegTheBatty wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:33 pm
If 5% Muslim population triggers a person to fear for their safety, they have the problem, not the community.
Oh, really? So a person who feels uncomfortable seeing people who look totally alien to him or her and want to enforce their way of life on that person has the "problem"?

Muslims in the UK should be assimilating and not trying to enforce their ways of life onto the natives. Due to a large amount of Muslims not wanting to do this, there is confrontation between Muslims and non-Muslims in the UK and other parts of the world for that matter.

It's not rocket science to recognise that people who live together who don't share similar values will clash.
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 496
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Brexit

Post by Goody67 » Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:42 pm

Poodle wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:38 pm
A) There are absolutely zero no-go areas in London. Or in any other UK city, town or village.
How do you know?
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

User avatar
Austin Harper
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5514
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:22 pm
Custom Title: Rock Chalk Astrohawk
Location: Detroit

Re: Brexit

Post by Austin Harper » Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:06 pm

Goody67 wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:37 pm
Austin Harper wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:22 pm
That article quotes on anonymous man who claims to work for the police and claims his bosses told him not to go to parts of London, but doesn't specify where. That's because he either the man or the whole story is made up. As previously requested, please name which areas of London are no-go areas.
https://metro.co.uk/2018/02/05/fearless ... e-7288616/
I don't understand what you're getting at. That article explicitly says that there aren't any no-go areas.
Metro UK wrote: The idea that there are ‘no go’ zones in London is frequently trotted out by right-wing writers, many of whom have never set foot in the UK.
Naturally, the idiocy is echoed by dim bulbs on the internet.
Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 496
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Brexit

Post by Goody67 » Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:10 pm

Austin Harper wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:06 pm
I don't understand what you're getting at. That article explicitly says that there aren't any no-go areas.
Metro UK wrote: The idea that there are ‘no go’ zones in London is frequently trotted out by right-wing writers, many of whom have never set foot in the UK.
Naturally, the idiocy is echoed by dim bulbs on the internet.
I never referenced that link as proof of a no-go zone area. I responded to the quote from another user about anonymity.

EDIT: Sorry, I skimmed over the quote and did not read the last sentence. My mistake.

Here is one example of an MP warning about no-go zone areas:

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/89530 ... phen-Timms
Last edited by Goody67 on Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
Has No Life
Posts: 11961
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Brexit

Post by OlegTheBatty » Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:12 pm

Poodle wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:38 pm
A) There are absolutely zero no-go areas in London. Or in any other UK city, town or village. And no-go areas have sod all to do with Brexit. Please start another thread.
B) Theresa May has just lost the Parliamentary vote on her 'new deal' again by a huge number - not quite as big as the last time, but close enough. There will now be another vote tomorrow, presumably on whether a no-deal would be acceptable. I can safely predict that it wouldn't be.
It does not appear that any proposition that contains a Brexit reference could get a majority vote.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

.......................Doesn't matter how often I'm proved wrong.................... ~ bobbo the pragmatist

User avatar
Austin Harper
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5514
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:22 pm
Custom Title: Rock Chalk Astrohawk
Location: Detroit

Re: Brexit

Post by Austin Harper » Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:20 pm

Goody67 wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:10 pm
Austin Harper wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:06 pm
Goody67 wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:37 pm
Austin Harper wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:22 pm
Goody67 wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:05 pm
https://www.lbc.co.uk/hot-topics/crime- ... eas-in-lo/

Only someone with their eyes closed would deny that there are areas in the UK, predominantly in London, in which non-Muslims are not welcome. It is not a myth to state that many British people do not feel safe in many areas of the UK due to the overrepresentation of Muslims.
That article quotes on anonymous man who claims to work for the police and claims his bosses told him not to go to parts of London, but doesn't specify where. That's because he either the man or the whole story is made up. As previously requested, please name which areas of London are no-go areas.
https://metro.co.uk/2018/02/05/fearless ... e-7288616/
I don't understand what you're getting at. That article explicitly says that there aren't any no-go areas.
Metro UK wrote:
The idea that there are ‘no go’ zones in London is frequently trotted out by right-wing writers, many of whom have never set foot in the UK.
Naturally, the idiocy is echoed by dim bulbs on the internet.
I never referenced that link as proof of a no-go zone area. I responded to the quote from another user about anonymity.
The "other" user was me. The first article you cited from LBC was from an anonymous person claiming that there were no-go areas. You then provided a link to a second article from Metro UK that was about a real person, but unfortunately for you the real person gave evidence that no-go areas are made up.
EDIT: quotes added back in for clarity
Last edited by Austin Harper on Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 496
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Brexit

Post by Goody67 » Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:22 pm

Austin Harper wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:20 pm
The "other" user was me. The first article you cited from LBC was from an anonymous person claiming that there were no-go areas. You then provided a link to a second article from Metro UK that was about a real person, but unfortunately for you the real person gave evidence that no-go areas are made up.
Indeed it was, and? I cited a link of an MP who mentioned no-go zone areas - people do refer to no-go zone areas.

You're not even from the UK, so how do you know what it is like in parts of London and the rest of the UK?
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

User avatar
Austin Harper
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5514
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:22 pm
Custom Title: Rock Chalk Astrohawk
Location: Detroit

Re: Brexit

Post by Austin Harper » Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:24 pm

You cited a link to a made-up claim by an anonymous person that there were no-go areas.
Then you cited a link to a real story about a real person going to a supposed no-go area without being in any danger and seeing pork for sale because no-go areas aren't a real thing.
Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 496
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Brexit

Post by Goody67 » Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:30 pm

Austin Harper wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:24 pm
You cited a link to a made-up claim by an anonymous person that there were no-go areas.
Then you cited a link to a real story about a real person going to a supposed no-go area without being in any danger and seeing pork for sale because no-go areas aren't a real thing.
Then I cited an MP who warned about acid attacks and no-go zone areas. People do make reference to no-go zone areas. When was the last time you were in London or any part of the UK with a high Muslim population? You're living in la-la land if you think that in the UK, and other parts of Europe, that Europeans have not been affected by Muslim immigration.

Nearly 1/4 of Muslims in the UK would like to see Sharia Law implemented in the UK (more respect certain so-called aspects of it) and 1/2 of Muslims in the UK think that homosexuality should be illegal.

I don't regard those concepts as being compatible with Western values, do you?
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

User avatar
Austin Harper
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5514
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:22 pm
Custom Title: Rock Chalk Astrohawk
Location: Detroit

Re: Brexit

Post by Austin Harper » Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:36 pm

Can you even read? The article you shared about acid attacks is titled Debunking Maps of Alleged “Islamic No Go Zones” in London and it says
Bellingcat wrote:What we see here is a combination of two interesting trends. One is the conflation of caustic liquid attacks, erroneously called “acid attacks” (many attackers use caustic substances that are not, in fact, acids), with Islam. The BBC analysed the statistics on such attacks in a useful article. The majority of perpetrators are either white Europeans or of African/Caribbean descent. South Asians, a demographic category which includes many Muslims, are three times as likely to be the victims as opposed to perpetrators of “acid attacks”.” There’s no evidence tying this form of violence to sectarianism.
The other trend we have to understand is that ANYTHING labeled a “no go zone” will be appropriated by bigots, trolls, and misguided people for their own purposes.
Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 496
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Brexit

Post by Goody67 » Tue Mar 12, 2019 9:05 pm

Austin Harper wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:36 pm
Can you even read? The article you shared about acid attacks is titled Debunking Maps of Alleged “Islamic No Go Zones” in London and it says
Bellingcat wrote:What we see here is a combination of two interesting trends. One is the conflation of caustic liquid attacks, erroneously called “acid attacks” (many attackers use caustic substances that are not, in fact, acids), with Islam. The BBC analysed the statistics on such attacks in a useful article. The majority of perpetrators are either white Europeans or of African/Caribbean descent. South Asians, a demographic category which includes many Muslims, are three times as likely to be the victims as opposed to perpetrators of “acid attacks”.” There’s no evidence tying this form of violence to sectarianism.
The other trend we have to understand is that ANYTHING labeled a “no go zone” will be appropriated by bigots, trolls, and misguided people for their own purposes.
As I explained, a 5% Muslim population would be sufficient in some areas to make a no-go zone area. Why don't you get a plane from Detroit and go to Birmingham, Leeds, Bradford, Luton, Tower Hamlets, etc?

Immigration has changed the UK beyond recognition to the point where in many areas one doesn't even feel like he or she is in the UK.
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain