The 'Take it Outside' thread This thread will no longer be moderated *** Showing 4,101-4,150 of 5,982

[Lynne (Tigger's Mum)]

They will just be a facilitating corridor to fast track anyone into Europe at a price.

[T4bsF (Call me Flo)]

Lynne (Tigger's Mum) wrote: "They will be joining the EU. They are holding the EU to ransom over the migrant situation as a bargaining tool. You should read European newspapers."

I'd give it up as a bad job Lynne... not too sure if they are just missing the point, or just refusing to change their stance no matter what!!!

[Lynne (Tigger's Mum)]

Yes , the phrase about there's none so blind etc. applies .
We were talking at home about the downturn in the French holiday trade. It's really hurting some businesses that rely on the summer trade. Its economic warfare going on out there,

[Will]

So let me see if I've got this right. You are worried about Turkey joining the EU - which may never happen and could be years away even if does. And it certainly couldn't happen if the UK was a member of the EU and exercised its veto.

Then you believe that this would increase the risk of terrorism ... why? Because all Turks are terrorists or criminals?

And that this somehow makes us more vulnerable to terrorism than we are at the moment, when Turks can visit the UK anyway (with a visa)?

And let's imagine for a second that Turkey did pose a terrorism risk and was about to join the EU. Should we (a) be in Europe so we can veto their application or (b) give away our veto and have a land border with the EU in Ireland?

I suppose it's a natural human reaction to news stories. We all have a tendency to cherry pick those stories which fit a conclusion that we have already reached. I don't see the failed coup in Turkey as anything to do with the impact of the EU referendum. If anything, the problems in Turkey make it far less likely to be able to join the EU.

[Jim]

Will wrote: "So let me see if I've got this right. You are worried about Turkey joining the EU - which may never happen and could be years away even if does. And it certainly couldn't happen if the UK was a mem..."

no
Let's go though this slowly
The Germans, or at least Merkel, had an understanding with the Turks to keep refugees out of Europe. This agreement is in danger of collapsing. Up until now it's worked pretty well the torrent through the Balkans has slowed to a trickle.
But the quid pro quo for the deal was more visas for Turks. A lot more visas for Turks. In fact according to most sources is was visa free access for Turks

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wor...


http://www.spiegel.de/international/e...

[T4bsF (Call me Flo)]

Will just doesn't seem to be the budging sort Jim.

[Will]

We can go through it at whatever speed you want.

There were rumours of a deal being brokered by Germany which were flatly denied by the UK Government:

http://www.itv.com/news/2016-06-12/cl...

As usual, the important thing is to read all of the news and not just the bits that you like.

[Lynne (Tigger's Mum)]

Don't be simplistic Will, I'm not saying Turks are terrorists, I'm saying their agenda is to overrun Europe. There are many ways of killing a cat.

[Patti (baconater)]

As long as Erdogan is in power, Turkey won't join the EU. He's like Aliyev. Wants the economic benefits with the west but won't give up his dictatorship to get it.

[David]

Patti (baconater) wrote: "As long as Erdogan is in power, Turkey won't join the EU. He's like Aliyev. Wants the economic benefits with the west but won't give up his dictatorship to get it."

Gotta agree.

[Michael]

Overrun Europe?

We're verging into conspiracy theory territory here. What is the supposed endgame in all this?

[David]

[Lynne (Tigger's Mum)]

Why should it be a conspiracy theory? There are hundreds of thousands of displaced people streaming across Europe. Many unscrupulous people are making huge sums of money out of it, others like the anarchist movements are gaining ground. There are politicians using the situation to their advantage, cheap labour etc. They aren't in a conspiracy it's sheer opportunism. The migrant/refugee crisis is the vehicle for their ambitions. There is no endgame only consequences and casualties.

[Michael]

Whose agenda where you referring to earlier?

[Jim]

Will wrote: "We can go through it at whatever speed you want.

There were rumours of a deal being brokered by Germany which were flatly denied by the UK Government:

http://www.itv.com/news/2016-06-12/cl......"

your bit is totally irrelevant. I was not talking about Turks entering the UK. I was talking about Turks entering the rest of the EU.
And if this isn't allowed, even more refugees entering the EU

Not of this directly applies to the UK (although we were expected to take quotas at one point before the Commission was told to go play with itself by a number of member states

What does apply to the UK is the fact that this is going to cause further ructions within the EU, a possible/probable breakdown of Schengen and demands from some member states for money to cope with it

[Jim]

Patti (baconater) wrote: "As long as Erdogan is in power, Turkey won't join the EU. He's like Aliyev. Wants the economic benefits with the west but won't give up his dictatorship to get it."

There isn't a lot of point Turkey being in the EU, they've already got a customs union (http://www.avrupa.info.tr/fileadmin/C...) and being any closer would mean them paying money and being caught up in the CAP.

Interesting that nobody mentioned Turkey when they said it was impossible to have free trade without free movement :-)

[Lynne (Tigger's Mum)]

Michael Cargill wrote: "Whose agenda where you referring to earlier?"
Erdigan he wants another caliphate. He doesn't want Turkey to be a secular state.

[Michael]

Okay, so what does that have to do with the UK's membership of the EU?

[Lynne (Tigger's Mum)]

The unrest that is brewing in Europe is a good enough reason for me not to want to be part of it. I really feel that if we have the chance to be less dependent on Europe, when it all kicks off we would recover quicker. I can't say it plainer than that.

[Michael]

The unrest will effect us whether we are in the EU or not.

The only difference now is that we are on the outside and have no say in anything that they decide to put in place.

[Patti (baconater)]

Michael Cargill wrote: "The unrest will effect us whether we are in the EU or not.

The only difference now is that we are on the outside and have no say in anything that they decide to put in place."

Yep.

[Patti (baconater)]

Jim wrote: "Patti (baconater) wrote: "As long as Erdogan is in power, Turkey won't join the EU. He's like Aliyev. Wants the economic benefits with the west but won't give up his dictatorship to get it."

There..."

Very interesting that the western goods we get in Baku have all come through Turkey.

[Will]

Lynne (Tigger's Mum) wrote: "Don't be simplistic Will, I'm not saying Turks are terrorists, I'm saying their agenda is to overrun Europe. There are many ways of killing a cat."

"Don't be simplistic" .... and then you say something incredibly simplistic?

"I'm not saying the Turks are terrorists" ... and then you accuse them of wanting to overrun Europe?

You've got to be joking. Right? You can't say that with a straight face, surely?

[Lynne (Tigger's Mum)]

may I take you back to your comment 4107 2nd paragraph. You made assertions that I believed it would increase the risk of terrorism. And then you said Why, because all Turks are terrorists or criminals?
As that wasn't at all my point I can't answer something I didn't say.
Your last post takes two points and makes an amalgam that just isn't there. Perhaps a re read might clarify your confusion.

[Geoff (G. Robbins) (merda constat variat altitudo)]

Jim and Lynne, you are wasting your typing skills expecting to change Will's mind on anything. He will never do that. This is proven in every discussion that has taken place that he supports. There are not so blind as those who refuse to see.

Michael, we are already excluded from part of the EU. Decisions are made within the Euro zone to which we are not a party and don't have any influence over, even if they affect the UK.

[Will]

Resorting to insults again, Geoff? As usual, it says far more about you than it does about the person you are insulting.

We each have a point of view and a right to express that point of view. You are not going to win an argument by trying to shout someone down or by ad hominem attacks. If anything it shows that you have run out of arguments yourself.

The Turkey question was one of the more disreputable elements of the Leave campaign, where they tried to whip up irrational fears about the UK being overrun by terrorists from Turkey, or from its neighbouring countries.

This was condemned at the time as divisive gutter journalism which has no place in British politics:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentis...

And yet this point of view still persists. When you talk to people about questions like this, they quickly stop talking about facts and start talking about emotions. Never mind that Turkey aren't likely to join the EU. Never mind that member states have a veto on new members joining. Never mind that the UK isn't part of Schengen. All some people see are the vague threats and scaremongering of rags like the Express and Daily Mail.

I would change my mind on anything if someone produces credible evidence. In this case, there never was any evidence in the first place and there certainly isn't any now. All I can see is gutter journalism designed to appeal to general fears about terrorism and prejudices about race.

[Jim]

Michael Cargill wrote: "The unrest will effect us whether we are in the EU or not.

The only difference now is that we are on the outside and have no say in anything that they decide to put in place."

as opposed to a 28th share of a say in what they decide to do?

[Jim]

Patti (baconater) wrote: "Very interesting that the western goods we get in Baku have all come through Turkey...."

I'd guess it's a side effect of the Turks being in the customs union.

[Will]

Jim wrote: "as opposed to a 28th share of a say in what they decide to do?"

Or a 193rd share of what the UN does.

Or living in a parliamentary democracy where each MP has a 650th share in what Parliament does. And each voter has roughly a 70,000 share of the vote for their MP.

Or being a citizen of the UK which gives each of us a 44.7 millionth share in a referendum.

That is what it means to be in a democracy. We each get a vote, but then so does everyone else. When we join a club we share decision-making with other members of that club.

[Jim]

I realise you're not really in favour of democracy but to claim we have a major influence in the EU is flying in the face of all the evidence

UK political leaders have been talking about changing it, making it more democratic, and moving away from 'ever closer union' for over forty years and have had no effect whatsoever in this process

[Geoff (G. Robbins) (merda constat variat altitudo)]

Will wrote: "Resorting to insults again, Geoff? As usual, it says far more about you than it does about the person you are insulting.

We each have a point of view and a right to express that point of view. You..."

Prove me wrong, Will. Show me one point throughout this whole thread, where you have changed your mind on any subject during the discussion. If I'm insulting you, that should be easy, right?

And, as a point of reference, I was not addressing you, I was addressing Lynne and Jim. It seems that everything you cannot answer, you turn into an alleged insult.

[Will]

Jim wrote: "I realise you're not really in favour of democracy but to claim we have a major influence in the EU is flying in the face of all the evidence

UK political leaders have been talking about changing ..."

"Not in favour of democracy"????

Please, please, please don't turn into Geoff. You're better than that. There is no need for insults. It is precisely because I believe in democracy that I will defend democratic ideals such as the rule of law and international relations.

It's quite simple. The UK's interests are best served by a range of decision-making structures ranging from the local to the international to the global. My bins are emptied by the district council. Social services are managed by the county council. Government of the state and national laws are managed by the UK Government. Trading agreements with our trading partners are managed by organisations such as the EU. International law is managed by bodies like the UN and its subsidiaries.

That's how democracy works at different levels of decision-making. It is largely how democracy has worked for decades and how it will continue to work regardless of the UK's relationship to Europe.

The UK has had a major role in Europe which extends beyond its one twenty 28th share, just as Germany and France have a major role. You're not going to now say that Germany's influence is 1/28th too, are you?

But contrary to the EU-myths in the gutter press, the EU does not set all of the UK's legislation. It largely sets those regulations which are beneficial to a trading partnership. And which we will almost certainly need to reproduce if we want to trade with Europe.

Geoff - I will change my opinion if you provide evidence. So far you haven't done that.

[Geoff (G. Robbins) (merda constat variat altitudo)]

Will wrote: "Geoff - I will change my opinion if you provide evidence. So far you haven't done that. "

Oh no, Will, you cannot get off the hook that easily. I'm not just talking about me, I'm talking about ANY change of opinion.

And, by the way. you should practice what you preach about insults:

"Please, please, please don't turn into Geoff. You're better than that."

Hypocrite.

[Will]

To use your own line - I was not addressing you. I was addressing Jim. This is almost too easy.

You want to know where I have changed my opinion? Fine, let's have a list.

In the 1990s, I was sceptical about climate change. The weight of evidence in the 2000s changed my mind.

I was convinced the 2015 election would be a hung Parliament. I did not see the Conservatives winning at all.

I was (and remain) utterly gobsmacked that Trump has made it this far in the Presidential race.

I misread how weak Corbyn would be in the EU referendum. I thought he was a more accomplished speaker and communicator than he turned out to be.

I was totally wrong on how low the Leave campaign were prepared to go, and how they managed to spin the referendum with a pack of lies. I still don't know how Gove managed to persuade perfectly rational people to ignore experts.

Your turn.

[Geoff (G. Robbins) (merda constat variat altitudo)]

Will wrote: "To use your own line - I was not addressing you. I was addressing Jim. This is almost too easy.

You want to know where I have changed my opinion? Fine, let's have a list.

In the 1990s, I was sceptical about climate change. The weight of evidence in the 2000s changed my mind.Outside the scope of the Question

I was convinced the 2015 election would be a hung Parliament. I did not see the Conservatives winning at all. Outside the scope of the question

I was (and remain) utterly gobsmacked that Trump has made it this far in the Presidential race.Outside the scope of the question

I misread how weak Corbyn would be in the EU referendum. I thought he was a more accomplished speaker and communicator than he turned out to be.Outside the scope of the question

I was totally wrong on how low the Leave campaign were prepared to go, and how they managed to spin the referendum with a pack of lies. I still don't know how Gove managed to persuade perfectly rational people to ignore experts.Outside the quote of the question

Your turn. "

Show me one point throughout this whole thread, where you have changed your mind on any subject during the discussion.

You're not an idiot Will, you knew my question, but decided to not answer it. Try again, and stop being evasive.

[Will]

So your question was "any change of opinion" and you are now trying to limit the changes of opinion that you will accept?

Make your mind up.

[Lynne (Tigger's Mum)]

We talk in parallel here. Like train tracks, some running in the same direction, occasionally the points cross.
I wasn't impressed last night with being mis quoted but I'm not derailed. I'm still chuffing but not going round and round on the same track :o)

[Geoff (G. Robbins) (merda constat variat altitudo)]

Will wrote: "So your question was "any change of opinion" and you are now trying to limit the changes of opinion that you will accept?

Make your mind up."

Obfuscation does not become you, Will. My question hadn't changed, but good try.

The exact question I asked was "Show me one point throughout this whole thread, where you have changed your mind on any subject during the discussion."

The limit was in place from the start. None of the points you make about a change of mind are relevant or evidentially supported. In this thread we can see EXACTLY, when you've changed your mind because of debate here.

Now, answer the question.

[Jim]

Will wrote: " It is precisely because I believe in democracy that I will defend democratic ideals such as the rule of law and international relations...."

I'm a democrat. The people voted at a referendum. I accept the result just as I accepted the results of the ten general elections I've been able to vote in. In many of them I felt the electorate had come to a wrong decision. In retrospect many others who voted for the party that became the government would agree that the electorate came to the wrong decision. But I accept the decision.

[Will]

Jim - I am a democrat. The people voted in a referendum where they were given highly misleading information by one side in particular. I will accept the result when it is clear that it has been taken on the basis of facts.

I have never known a general election where one side has relied on such a level of misinformation and downright lies as we have seen in this referendum. And the difference is that a general election can be reversed five years later. Leaving the EU can't be corrected so quickly.

Democracy does not mean lying your way to a narrow victory and then trying to deny any further voting ever.

The funny thing is that if the referendum had been a narrow remain victory, the leave camp would have been screaming at the top of their voices that there needed to be another referendum. You know it. I know it.

[Will]

Geoff - I've given you several. Let's add some more. I was wrong in thinking that Boris would become PM. I didn't see him being knife by Gove. Then I was wrong again about him being made foreign secretary.

I have been constantly surprised about how people still believe in the EU myths like banning straight bananas or the "Turkey will overrun the EU stuff" we've seen on this page.

I have been taken aback by the post-truth attitude that we are seeing coming through in the increase in racism after the Brexit vote or the people who are still insistent on voting for Trump. And I still can't get my head around Michael Gove saying that we don't need experts any more.

Have I changed my mind on Brexit? Partly. I had been worried that we would be railroaded into a disastrous hard Brexit by hardliners such as Boris, Gove or Ledsom. That would have been absolutely disastrous. Now we seem to be heading for a Brexit-lite under Theresa May which might not be so bad. Nowhere near as good as it would have been had we stayed in the EU, but not as awful as a Boris for PM scenario.

Your turn.

[Marc]

Very few of those examples are you having your opinion changed, they are about you being proved wrong by an outcome or surprised by an outcome. The only one that is an actual change of your opinion is climate change.

But when did anyone ever have their opinion changed by calm, rational exchange over forums and social media?

[T4bsF (Call me Flo)]

I was convinced the 2015 election would be a hung Parliament. I did not see the Conservatives winning at all.

I was (and remain) utterly gobsmacked that Trump has made it this far in the Presidential race.

I misread how weak Corbyn would be in the EU referendum. I thought he was a more accomplished speaker and communicator than he turned out to be.

I was totally wrong on how low the Leave campaign were prepared to go, and how they managed to spin the referendum with a pack of lies. I still don't know how Gove managed to persuade perfectly rational people to ignore experts.

All the things you mention Will are just you being wrong about things and having your mind changed for you by having fait accomplis landing in your lap........ not you changing your mind!!!

[Geoff (G. Robbins) (merda constat variat altitudo)]

Marc wrote: "Very few of those examples are you having your opinion changed, they are about you being proved wrong by an outcome or surprised by an outcome. The only one that is an actual change of your opinion is climate change. "

T4bsF wrote: "All the things you mention Will are just you being wrong about things and having your mind changed for you by having fait accomplis landing in your lap........ not you changing your mind!!! "

I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees that the only one you've actually changed your opinion on is climate change, and even that was prior to this thread.

Considering your education I'd be surprised if you don't know the difference. Perhaps I am overrating you?

As you insist on saying: your turn.

[Michael]

This is an 83-page thread that is sporadically used to discuss political goings on, so it's hardly a surprise if it doesn't inspire much in the way of actual opinion-changing.

[T4bsF (Call me Flo)]

Michael - if anything had been said prior to the Referendum, that made sense to me - enough sense to alter my opinion - I would gladly have changed the way I was going to vote.

[Jim]

Will wrote: "Jim - I am a democrat. The people voted in a referendum where they were given highly misleading information by one side in particular...."

Sorry but that is rubbish. Both sides lied 'like a bulletin'

All the lies of 'project fear' when senior political leaders lined up to say that the UK would have to go to the back of the queue when it came to trade deals, and suddenly they'll all wanting to negotiate.

[Jim]

T4bsF (Call me Flo) wrote: I was convinced the 2015 election would be a hung Parliament. I did not see the Conservatives winning at all.

I was (and remain) utterly gobsmacked that Trump has made it this far in the Presidential race.

I misread how weak Corbyn would be in the EU referendum. I thought he was a more accomplished speaker and communicator than he turned out to be.

...."

With the 2015 election you were in good company. If Cameron thought he'd win he wouldn't have promised the referendum, as it was he could promise it assuming that the libdems would veto it as part of the coalition discussions

Like you, I'm somewhat surprised that Trump got this far. For me it's become more explicable having seen 'liberal American' posts on Facebook. There's only so long you can hold a large proportion of your population in contempt and sneer at them all the time before they revolt.

With regard to Corbyn, given that he had to frantically take down a lot of blog posts showing how anti-EU he was before he became labour leader, expecting him to lead the campaign to stay in was never going to happen. He is very much part of the left wing faction that regarded the EU as the source of globalisation and austerity

[Marc]

while that's true of Corbyn's personal views on the EU, I do think a significant factor was Labour's drubbing in Scotland after sharing platforms with Tories in the independence referendum which led to them being viewed as 'Red Tories' and being punished accordingly at the general election. I think Corbyn was anxious to avoid something similar happening among its core support in England

[T4bsF (Call me Flo)]

Jim wrote: "T4bsF (Call me Flo) wrote: I was convinced the 2015 election would be a hung Parliament. I did not see the Conservatives winning at all.

I was (and remain) utterly gobsmacked that Trump has made i..."

Jim - my post was only a reply to the points Will was making - not my original comments.