Forum menu
Making a unilateral statement that EU citizens can stay without a similar agreement from the EU for UK citizens would have been very naïve.
Well it's not the UK which has a Buhka ban or is passing legislation preventing EU citizens from claiming unemployment benefits whilst at the same time pretending to stand at the centre of the EU. It's not the UK government which agreed cosy triple-Irish tax breaks amounting to a 1% corporate tax rate. I have more but I think you get the gist ...
Isn't that just whataboutery? I'm sure there are dozens of examples from both sides. Doesn't make this decision any less morally dubious.
Pigface - perhaps but a degree of irony ypu pointing that out ! Chapeau btw for the Fake News joke in the Trump thread
the EU said immediately it was supportive of a special deal for the Irish/NI border
I realise you've demonstrated spectacular ignorance in the past of what you termed a backward country, but if we need to spell out to you why the Ireland/NI border is a very special case and can be treated separately from your pissing contest over reciprocal citizens' residency rights, then you're even more ignorant than you've previously shown. It's far simpler for the likes of you to constantly conflate complex issues together though. I understand why you do it and why you won't stop.
Making a unilateral statement that EU citizens can stay without a similar agreement from the EU for UK citizens would have been very naïve.
Another way of saying that peoples lives are a useful negotiating tool then?
Don't flatter your self Jamba, you claimed that Clinton had had a stroke, I called you out on it, you didn't provide any evidence, you are a liar.
It woud be the right thing to do.
You don't give much of a shit do you? There's a point where we need to stop playing the game and do the right thing. You'll find that in that situation people are often inspired to also do the right thing.
It should not be part of the negotiations, at all ever. So it can't be naieve, it can only be upright and decent.
I have more but I think you get the gist ...
Umm.. moral high ground is NOT a relative concept! If I point out something morally dubious one side has done, pointing out other worse things other people do does not make it okay!
Peyote - I think May owns the moral high ground on this issue. EU are the villans.
Yes agreed and fair enough, there are issues bith sides. That's really what I was trying to show.
People can have whatever views they like pigface - equally they should expect to be challenged when they post BS - and its up to them how they respond. This is just an internet chat forum.
Over the past 15 pages of so the BS baton has passed firmly from the Brexshiteers to the Remoaners. It helps no one to have such BS form any part of the on-going narrative - in fact it probably scares many given the stories made up ^
But i do delight in trying to discover facts behind stories, true, and that may wind up those who prefer to deal in BS admittedly - guilty as charged 😉
Pigface - Member
Don't flatter your self Jamba, you claimed that Clinton had had a stroke, I called you out on it, you didn't provide any evidence, [b]you are a liar.[/b]
Is this an example of your more considered and conciliatory tone?
Peyote - I think May owns the moral high ground on this issue. EU are the villans.
Why? She has the power to make things better, she chooses not to exercise it. That makes her a "villain" in my book.
. EU are the villans.
What a truly stupid thing to post
It would be idiotic and a dereliction of her duty to UK citizens abroad (who absolutely should be her priority) to make a unilateral declaration
THM leaf out of your own book, Jamba told a lie, he was challenged on it.
In this case it's absolutely the right term. Villans.
Really 🙄
Mol and peyote - you continue to ignore the fact that she chose to exercise her power and responsibility to avoid making this an issue. It was not the UK who rejected the idea in Jan in favour of making bargaining chips.
But keep making things up - the Brexhsiteers may have won one battle but they are losing the BS version now
It would be idiotic and a dereliction of her duty to UK citizens abroad [b](who absolutely should be her priority)[/b] to make a unilateral declaration
😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 It's been a slow morning in Casa de Sasquatch, so go on, why?
Pigface, I have challenged Jambas consistently on this thread, what's you point? I prefer to deal with the lies themselves, rather than the individuals making them. Good & sensible people get facts wrong - calling them liers is rather antagonistic dont you think - not even ninners goes that far does he?
On this issue I agree with him as do the facts.
What a truly stupid thing to post
he has a lot to keep up with on that score TBF and a long way behind today
Pigface see TMH's reply above. May did the right thing, morally and pragmatically. The EU chose to support the Irish peace process but not UK citizens hence putting "their own" EU citizens in limbo.
Making a unilateral statement that EU citizens can stay without a similar agreement from the EU for UK citizens would have been very naïve.
Another way of saying that peoples lives are a useful negotiating tool then?
Yes it would be a very useful, it would show a clear good faith. Something that may be in short supply going forward if the UK carries on with its demands.
Captain - she's the UK PM, her priority is UK citizens at home and abroad. Second is everyone else.
That FWIW is one if the (many) problems of the Lisbon Treaty, it says all EU citizens must be treated equally to your own. Bonkers and impractical. Rejected at the Referendum.
She is neglecting her duty to UK citizens abroad because by showing a clear intent to use EU citizens as a negotiating tool she is also setting them up as pawns for negotiation. The very best thing she could do for them is to make a clear commitment to current EU citizens here, showing good faith and setting a precedent that would be politically impossible for other EU leaders to ignore.
My feeling is that the reason she isn't doing that is that she really does intend to use them as pawns, and would be quite happy to see them deported if she doesn't get what she wants in other areas.
It would be idiotic and a dereliction of her duty to UK citizens abroad (who absolutely should be her priority) to make a unilateral declaration
You mean the ones who weren't allowed a vote? or those in NI and Gibratar who voted to remain????
Supporting the NI Peace Process is showing regard for quite a lot of UK citizens too by the way.
THM hang on it's ok for you you be "blunt" but I can't call Jamba a liar? He never retracted his claim about Clinton even after numerous people asked him for evidence. Let's not be hypocritical about this.
Jamba so the EU are villains?
More to the point this was entirely predictable.
May should have seen this coming and offered it as a concession straight away.
Just as with her attempt to ram it all thru without consulting parliament and then challenging the law in the courts, when shown it was wrong.
Doesnt speak well of her ability in the proper negotiations.
After her shambolic showing as home sec, shouldn't really be a surprise tho.
Jamba & THM
I thought we'd already established that until we know the UK's position that, ie in/out of EEA, we won't know whether it'll be the EU or the individual countries who'll decide the fate of Britains' abroad.
And vv for the UK too, if in/out of EEA.
My feeling is that the reason she isn't doing that is that she really does intend to use them as pawns, and would be quite happy to see them deported if she doesn't get what she wants in other areas.
I agree - Brexit has put us in such a de facto weak negotiation position that she will use whatever she has, even at the risk of compromising the very values that makes Britain great. The irony is strong on that one.
On the contrary - despite her relatively crap record as H Sec - she has kept a very contentious and challenging piece of legislation on timetable and relatively unscathed (perhaps totally) and has maintained good dialogue with the Europeans that count including, most importantly, sensible stuff from/with Barnier.
Given the nightmare nature of the task, that is some achievement. In contrast:
Her predecessor lost a vote that should have been easy to win and lost his job
Ditto the previous CoEx
The Leader (sic) of HM Oppo has gone AWOL. Starmer aside the rest of his party are largely irrelevant
The LDs simply want to ignore the referendum result
And the SNP scoop the BS prize on a daily basis - Angus Robertson aside as he asks very good questions that often challenge the PM without any of wee nippy's whining
So compared with her poor record as HSec she is in-line for the Progress Prize!
That FWIW is one if the (many) problems of the Lisbon Treaty, it says all EU citizens must be treated equally to your own. Bonkers and impractical.
Yeah I was going to say that it's only the swivel eyed brexies that are able to consider Europeans living here as second class citizens, but you've done it for me
Dehumanisation is the first step...
Mol and peyote - you continue to ignore the fact that she chose to exercise her power and responsibility to avoid making this an issue. It was not the UK who rejected the idea in Jan in favour of making bargaining chips.
Yet she chooses not to rectify that error now? She has the power to ease many peoples concerns but doesn't. Seems disingenuous to me and I'm a UK citizen. To those who's lives are being used as negotiating tools it must seem far worse I would think.
It would be idiotic and a dereliction of her duty to UK citizens abroad (who absolutely should be her priority) to make a unilateral declaration
Her priority should be to all UK citizens agreed. Allowing non-citizens to stay would benefit the UK economically and morally. It would ease many peoples very real fears about their future. What difference it would make to future negotiations is debatable, but I'm not convinced it would be significant. I would be happy to hear your arguments as to why chucking (or at least threatening to) these folks out would be beneficial during the negotiations though?
For Pigface!
Agree with Kimbers - Jambas it has been an extraordinary achievement to reach a point where we (EU citizens ) are treated equally wherever we chose to live. You and I and our kids have been major beneficiaries of this.
THM you have lost me
Her predecessor lost a vote that should have been easy to win and lost his job
It was never going to be easy, the UK has a racist underbelly, always has. The press has spent 40 years lying aided and abetted by politicians taking the easy route for their incompetence. There should never have been a referendum as the debate had long since been poisoned.
If she was doing such a good job why waste taxpayers money on a court case she was going to loose? As for her record, it is her record at the HO that concerns me, she was the one who screwed the border force, the passport office, who authorised the trucks telling foreigners to go home.
If she was doing such a good job why is she insisting on ignoring most of the populations wishes and chasing the UKIP/BNP/Tory right?
Why is Amber Rudd still in office? Why is Boris ? etc.
Why are you asking people to argue for something that is not being proposed, Peyote?
The only issue is, do you make a unilateral declaration or a multi-lateral one. The heart says the former, the head the latter. She tried a sensible approach to avoid this before. This was rejected. So on that basis, I would marginally favour using her head not her heart.
I would also suggest that using inflammatory language like bargaining chips/chucking people out/storm troopers or posting links to stories that are unrelated to the issue under question may not be in the best interest of those exposed.
Still we all like a bit of froth
If she was doing such a good job why is she insisting on ignoring most of the populations wishes and chasing the UKIP/BNP/Tory right?
Golly that's a tough one
(for the same reason as HM Oppo perhaps? - clue 23 June 2016)
Last time I checked foreigners and illegal immigrants were not the same thing - but accept the point, she was pretty crap as HS which is why I am surprised that she is doing pretty well so far with the hospital pass that is Brexshit. May well end up biting her on her well-coutured backside in the end - we shall see...
[quote=jambalaya ]@Boarding (and TJ) did you see the STW'ers thread on his Polish son being excluded from 6yo's football in Scotland.
Aye, because a kids football team analogy is on a par with global politics
Don't think it has anything to do witht he moral highground
I'm not saying we shouldn'd be letting folks stay here, I'm saying that UK citizens should also have the benefit of staying where they are.
And like it or not (and I don't particularly) we are in a better position to negotiate with forign countires on the later if we haven't commited to the former.
Again, I don't agree with using folks as barganing chips, but in this case I feel we shouldn't also forget UK nationals that are facing uncertainty and a more favourable outcome for all would be more likely if an agreement was made by all sides sooner rather than later.
Taking the 'moral highground' may sort out EU nationals working here, but it will do absolutely nothing to alay the fears of uk nationals abroad.
Why are you asking people to argue for something that is not being proposed, Peyote?
Sorry, I didn't realise I was.
The only issue is, do you make a unilateral declaration or a multi-lateral one. The heart says the former, the head the latter. She tried a sensible approach to avoid this before. This was rejected. So on that basis, I would marginally favour using her head not her heart.
Well, reducing it down to such a simple argument is quite an easy way of looking at it. The problem is, I don't see much of a positive from going for your "head" route as it only seems to offer intangible/immeasurable (imaginary possibly) benefits to future negotiations. Whereas the "heart" route would offer more certainty in terms of economy (for those under threat and associated businesses) as well as a more morally palatable option.
I would also suggest that using inflammatory language like bargaining chips/chucking people out/storm troopers or posting links to stories that are unrelated to the issue under question may not be in the best interest of those exposed.
It's a reasonable suggestion. However emotive language is useful in describing how those under threat feel. If the media, politicians and those who feel vicitimised choose to use this language why should we be surprised considering what has gone on over the past few years?
BTW Is "negotiating tools" or "pawns" acceptable?
Still we all like a bit of froth
Oh yes, big fan of cappuccinos me!
Captain - she's the UK PM, her priority is UK citizens at home and abroad. Second is everyone else.
But Jambypoos, you said:
It would be idiotic and a dereliction of her duty to UK citizens abroad (who absolutely should be her priority)
That she should absolutely prioritse UK citizens abroad, expats like what you is.
Why should she absolutely prioritise people who love the UK so much that they choose to live abroad?
Lets consider where emotive, yet totally false, language that may have reflected how some felt on immigration got us.....
The nasty foreigners were the cause of all our problems. - smashing wages down, taking all the jobs, filling up hospitals and schools, the collapse of Leicester City FC etc - "apparently"
I think the key bit in your post to remember is the "totally false" bit.
Emotive language can be powerful. Measured, slightly patronising language can be powerful too dontchaknow!
May offered a deal in January to avoid all this aggro but it was rejected.
That's just bullshit pure and simple. She was trying to play games with a bit of megaphone diplomacy, knowing full well that there simply wasn't and still isn't an official negotiating body on the EU-27 side that was authorised to deal with any such proposition and speak on behalf of all 27 countries. She was trying to undermine the legally-established (but untested) process for leaving the EU, and score what she thought would be a few cheap poitical points in the meantime.
The UK is quite deliberately and unilaterally threatening the status and future not only of the 3m EU immigrants in this country but also the similarly large number of Brits abroad by deciding to leave the EU.
As an EU immigrant I am not worried about being allowed to stay in the UK as we had decided to leave before the vote anyway .
But i am disappointed that that so many people have voted to send us home .
and i am angry with the milionaires politicians who have lied through their teeth in pursuit of their own ideology .
[url= http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/database-protecting-uk-expats-from-brexit-misinformation-to-be-built-by-cambridge-researchers ]http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/database-protecting-uk-expats-from-brexit-misinformation-to-be-built-by-cambridge-researchers[/url]