tjagain Member

So its actually the UK governments that opened up the NHS to competative tendering not the EU

So you obviously didn’t read the link then. If you had actually read it you know that that is exactly the point that David Owen makes, he couldn’t be clearer. He blamed Labour, the Tories, and the LibDems.

glaring factual errors right from the start. a classic case of making the facts fit the theory.

Why for the love of god would David Owen do that? Do you actually know who David Owen is? Did you read my original post? I can reposted if you want, it’s easy enough to do.

I think what happened TJ is that you started to read the link and very quickly realised that it was going to make you feel extremely uncomfortable as it was going to challenge your own personal views on the EU, with in-depth, detailed, and carefully researched analysis, so you decided to abandon it.

You then posted “a classic case of making the facts fit the theory” without even reading it properly – which your later comment proves. You were probably trying to convince yourself as much as everyone else.

Brexit point scoring on a thread about wolves. I didn’t see that coming.

Still, “Wolves for Brexit” sounds like a good slogan. Where do I get the tee-shirt?

To bring things back to reality and very vaguely back to the topic of the thread, ie, what is the truth about the effect on the NHS of leaving the EU (there is an extensive thread about whether to stay or leave the EU)

A day or so ago I mentioned that there was an alternative opinion concerning the effects on the NHS of leaving the EU. Someone asked me to provide it, so I posted this :

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/BrexitNHSspeech.pdf

Now my experience of Remainers on here is that they are straining on their leashes to have a go at someone who dares to suggest that leaving the EU could be beneficial. So you can imagine my surprise when it received not one single response. I was so sure that it would get a response that I had already prepared mine, ie, I was going to say “well I’m not going to argue about it, either accept or reject it”. But nothing.

Still, if everyone is happy with what Dr David Owen had to say then I’m cool with that.

BTW just to add. I am acutely aware that 2 things above all else help fascists achieve power. The first is an economic crises, and the second is people not taking the threat that they pose seriously.

So I will never be dismissive of a genuine fascist threat.

So Ernie, you said that it was nothing to worry about because it’s never happened here.

That is perfect correct. I also said that of course anything can happen. If you want to consider all possibilities then you must consider the possibility that TJ will become PM, Drac will become Minster of Information, and Chewkw will become Foreign Secretary. How can you be sure that it won’t happen?

You gave the example of the Interior Minister of Austria as an example of what could happened in the UK. I stated that it was not feasible to assume that a similar thing could happen here. Without tediously repeating everything I previously said, I pointed out that the Austrian Interior Minister was a member of a party whose first leader had been a former Nazi Ministry and a SS officer.

The Freedom Party in Austria is a neo-Nazi organisation which among other things is fanatically Islamophobic and anti-Jewish.

I also pointed out that, unlike Austria, Fascists and Nazis have never got a foothold in UK politics, they have been trying for the last 80 years or so. They have never managed to get one single MP. I further pointed out that, unlike most of Europe, the far-right has been in retreat in the UK for the last 10 years. The BNP, which is undoubtedly fascist and neo-Nazi like the Austria Freedom Party, can’t manage to get one single councillor anywhere in the UK.

And I pointed out that every single Home Secretary for the last few hundred years has been a member of the Liberal Party, Tory Party, or Labour Party. The possibility of the next Home Secretary not being a member of one of those parties is extremely remote, to say the least. The possibility that they will be a member of a neo-Nazi party, such as the BNP, is even more remote, if that is possible.

Now if you want to pretend that the Brexit Party is a neo-Nazi party, while completely ignoring the fact that it was formed as a direct result of UKIP swinging to the far right and embracing the Islamophobia of fascist parties in Europe, such as the Northern League, the Freedom Party, and Golden Dawn, and on the basis of one opinion poll you’re now getting all hysterical because you think they are going to form the next government, then that’s up you.

But please don’t use it to justify allowing Alexander de Pfeffel Johnson to get away with deliberately and repeatedly lying, allegedly, to the British people. Try to think of a better reason.

It’s not really an issue.

It’s strange what people’s perceptions are. SaxonRider includes coyotes and lynx in the list but I struggle to believe that animals that small can pose any significant risk to humans.

The one animal that that is probably the number one predator on humans rarely makes the list. I can’t think of any animal other than crocodiles for whom humans would be a perfectly natural part of their diet. And yet crocodiles are rarely the first animal that people think of when asked about animals dangerous to humans.

Certainly pumas and bears pose a real risk to humans in North America but I suspect that the risk is probably over stated. Specially in the case of bears.

Wolves have over the centuries evolved to have a deep fear of humans, it’s only those that have survived.

If they are ever reintroduced into the UK I really wouldn’t worry, cows will still be the animal most likely to kill you.

Avoid wearing a red hoodie whilst riding the trails, not because of the big bad wolf, but because it’d make look like a ****.

I believe the behaviour of the anti-Zionist Orthodox Jews is primarily motivated by fundamentalist religious beliefs, not sympathy with the Palestinian cause. Their doctrine teaches that it is forbidden to have a Jewish state until the Messiah returns, so they view the existence of the Israeli state as a form of heresy.

That’s one of those comments which appears to be so confused and missing the point that you don’t really know quite where to start from.

The whole primary reason for establishing Israel in the “Holy Land” ie Palestine, is based on religious belief. The belief that several thousands of years ago God promised the Jews Israel. Israel is the “Promise Land”, a claim shared by Christian fundamentalist in the United States who use it to justify their total support for Israel.

If Jews were to be given their own special homeland (I consider a British Jew’s homeland to be Britain, an Italian Jew’s homeland to be Italy, etc, to suggest otherwise is racist imo) after World War 2, then it should have been, imo, a large chunk of Germany. Quite apart from anything else it would have provided a permanent reminder to arguably the greatest crime against humanity in human history.

The ONLY reason Palestine was chosen was a religious one.

Palestine was chosen in reparation for crimes committed by Europeans over many centuries against Jews, because of religious claims, not because they were already there – 80% of the Arab population had to be either driven out or expelled.

Palestinians who can quite honestly prove that their parents or grandparents owned land in Palestine have no rights, but Jews living the other side of the world who make rather dubious claims that their ancestors lived in Palestine thousands of years have their rights protected by the military and financial might of the West.

How the **** can that be, surely it’s not possible? Well it is when you see it as a religious claim. The pro-Zionist Jew who was shouting at the Orthodox Jews at the demonstration “God is on our side” made that very clear.

So if you are going to dismiss the Orthodox Jews opposition to Israel because it is primarily motivated by religious beliefs then you must also dismiss all the support for Israel primarily motivated by religious beliefs.

Incidentally I think it is deeply insulting to suggest that Orthodox Jews “sympathy with the Palestinian cause” is only motived by religion and not genuine. It’s like suggesting that Christians aren’t really opposed to murder and that they only say it because it’s one of the Ten Commandants.

I know that the Good Captain made the comparison between Orthodox Jews and the “Westboro Baptist loons” but this comparison is completely false. The Westboro Baptists represent basically an extended family of well under 100 individuals, out of a total US population of over 300 million. There are about 2.2 million Orthodox Jews in the world and they represent about 20% of the Jewish population of Israel.

Sure, there are indeed some Orthodox Jews who don’t oppose Zionism, I wouldn’t claim otherwise, but conversely there are also many liberal and secular Jews who don’t support Zionism., some of whom were on the Palestinian Solidarity demo in Central London a couple of weeks ago.

The reason I gave the example of the Orthodox Jews was simply to emphasise the point that deeply religious Jews could be opposed to Israel, a rather important point when religion is being used to justify the case for Israel. It also amused me greatly to see Orthodox Jews chanting “shame on you” when a pro-Zionist Jew was shouting “God is on our side”

BTW I am acutely aware that if I was actually a high profile Labour Party member much of what I have posted on this thread could easily be taken out of context and I could now be facing expulsion from the party for anti-Semitism. It is one of several reasons why I have never joined the Labour Party.

Although do I agree with outofbreath that accusations of anti-Semitism probably don’t really cost the Labour Party many votes. I think that if people are really concerned about racism then they would recognise that racism directed at Black and Asian people, in terms of discrimination and violence, is far worse.

What it does do though is sow divisions within the party and creates a perception of disunity, which is extremely important to the opponents of the Labour Party. It also very significantly stifles all criticism of Israel. It has been a very long time since I last heard Corbyn (or any other senior Labour politician) condemn Israel. He has remained silent even after the latest UN condemnation of Israel.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/28/gaza-israel-un-inquiry-killings-protest-war-crimes-army

Because you probably won’t bother reading it :

The panel said in a statement that it had found “reasonable grounds to believe that Israeli snipers shot at journalists, health workers, children and persons with disabilities, knowing they were clearly recognisable as such”.

Thirty-five of those killed were children, three were clearly identifiable paramedics and two were clearly marked journalists, the report said.

They said: “These serious human rights and humanitarian law violations may constitute war crimes or crimes against humanity.”

Why would they do that? My understanding is that Tony Blair was the darling of the Right. They went in their droves to the polling stations to vote for him…… a couple of alt-right punters on here have openly admitted to voting for him.

Even right-wing Tories such as Margaret Thatcher have publicly declared their admiration for Tony Blair. She famously said that New Labour was her “greatest achievement”.

Besides there have already been attempts for private criminal prosecutions against Tony Blair, they failed. The courts decided that he was immune from prosecution. Which of course isn’t likely to act as a deterrent to any future Prime Minister who considers launching a bloody foreign war based on a bunch of lies, and which results in hundreds of thousands of deaths.

Plus the Attorney General successfully blocked the prosecution because apparently it could “involve details being disclosed under the Official Secrets Act”. Tony Blair has got his arse well covered.

Mind you I hope attempts to prosecute him are never completely abandoned. I want the thought of the risk of prosecution to be somewhere in the back of his mind every day for the rest of his life. Not because I think he might fear the punishment, but because of the devastating blow to his ego the thought of going down in history as a convicted criminal would cause.

Okay P-Jay ….. let me tell you “The Strange Story of Doctor David Qwen”. And are you sitting comfortably in your shelter raybanwomble?

Dr David Owen was of course the leading protagonist in the infamous “Gang Of Four”, the group of MPs who in 1981 broke away from the Labour Party to form their own political party. This course of action split the Labour vote and in no small way help to keep Margaret Thatcher as Prime Minister for 10 years.

Dr David Owen’s motivation was based on 3 major Labour Party policies which he claimed he could never under any circumstances support, ie, nationalisation of the banks, unilateral nuclear disarmament, and withdrawal from the European Community.

Dr David Owen was a particularly strong supporter of the European Community. Indeed he felt so strongly about it that resigned from Harold Wilson’s shadow cabinet in 1972 over Labour’s refusal to back British entry to the EEC. His new party, the Social Democratic Party, formed an electoral alliance with the equally pro-European Liberal Party.

Eventually in 1988 the two parties formed the Liberal Democratic Party, at which point Dr David Owen appears to disappear into political oblivion.

Now I don’t know when, nor whether it was a gradual process or a Road to Damascus moment, but at some point between then and 1996 Dr David Owen transformed himself in a Eurosceptic. I know that it wasn’t after 1996 because he claims that Tony Blair attempted to seduce back into the Labour Party then with promises of a bright political future. A believable claim imo as Owen had been quite a political heavyweight previously in the Labour Party. He had been, among other things, Shadow Secretary of State for Energy, Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, and Minister of State for Health and Social Security.

However he turned down the offer when he apparently realised that Blair was committed to taking Britain into the European currency (I think Gordon Brown won on that one) Owen claims that it was the “best decision I ever made in my life”.

Owen then pops up again in the political limelight just before the EU Referendum during the campaign. He is now a totally committed Brexiteer. Although the former physician hasn’t practised medicine for a long time healthcare and the NHS is still his passion, and he argues forcefully that it is vital to leave the EU to save the NHS. He led the Vote Leave ‘Save Our NHS’ campaign.

Ironical if he hadn’t done what did in a previous life Labour might have won the 1983 general election and the UK would have left the European Community.

Anyway that was the background, here is the alternative opinion that you requested. It’s by the now Lord David Owen. It’s a speech he made last year. It’s quite long, about 13 pages. It starts off quite interesting but then becomes a bit boring and tedious as it focuses details and technical issues.

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/BrexitNHSspeech.pdf

Btw I’m no fan of David Owen among my many criticisms of him is that he was a crap Foreign Secretary. During his tenure as Foreign Secretary he claimed that the only opposition to Shah of Iran consisted of communists. Let’s hope his grasp of healthcare issues is better than his grasp of foreign affairs was. I suspect that it probably is.

not quite, he also suggested that……

piha’s link to the BBC article didn’t claim any of that, just the allegation of Israeli embassy interference, why not – if there’s more to the story than just that?

As I said above in big bold capital letters, I have absolutely no time at all for anyone who suggests a global Jewish conspiracy. It’s not just a disgusting lie but also dangerous lie which was used to justify the Holocaust.

Unfortunately there are some people on the left who are lazy and sloppy in their thinking, and make the assumption that all Jews are Zionist and support Israel. In my experience when it is pointed out to them the dangerous and racist nature of their assumption they always accept the critism.

I have yet to meet anyone on left who actively promotes the “global Jewish conspiracy”. Perhaps they exist but I have yet to meet them, my only experience of such people has been from the far-right.

Ironically, and very coincidentally, I was supposed to be watching this film this evening :

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/5_Broken_Cameras

I walked out after a while as I couldn’t stomach watching heavily armed Israeli soldiers shooting at unarmed Palestinian children, and generally brutalising the population, bursting into homes, making arbitrary arrests, etc.

I know the shit that happens in Palestine, I don’t need to watch it on a big screen to make myself feel sick and angry.

I’d be interested to hear it.

Really? Sure? OK, but I’ve got a bit on right now, I’ll try to get back later, or tomorrow.

They’re the Jewish equivalent of ………

I call racist!

He is accused of saying: “This is off the record. It’s almost certain who is behind all this anti-Semitism against Jeremy [Corbyn], almost certainly it’s the Israeli embassy.”

He’s been suspended for THAT????

Thank **** I’m not a member of the Labour Party!

Do people have any idea how much the Israeli government has to loose if Corbyn were ever to become UK Prime Minister? The UK is a very major arms to supplier to Israel, and Israel needs access to British weapons to maintain its relentless repression of the Palestinian people. The UK is also a Permanent Member of the UN Security Council, Corbyn being UK Prime Minister would be an absolute disaster for them.

The Israeli embassy is the permanent diplomatic mission of the Israeli government, that’s the role of an embassy. It’s there to serve the interests of the home country. To suggest that the Israeli embassy isn’t briefing against Corbyn or actively engaging in undermining him, is as absurd as claiming that during the Apartheid era the South African embassy wasn’t actively engaging in undermining the Anti-apartheid Movement in the UK – of course it was. And claiming that it was didn’t make you an anti-white racist!

But let’s be absolutely clear about one thing, which I have to admit tragically even some people on the left fail to fully grasp. THERE IS NO GLOBAL JEWISH CONSPIRACY! AND THERE HAS NEVER BEEN! To suggest there is, is vile, disgusting, and racist.

What there is without doubt, however, is coordinated activity among Zionists. Zionism is a political ideology. It’s NOT a race, nor a religion, it’s just an ideology. A great deal of the most outspoken opponents of Zionism and Israel are Jews – never ever forget that.

A couple of weeks ago I attended a demonstration in Central London to mark Nakba Day (the Great Catastrophe). Among the thousands who attended were many Jews, proudly proclaiming their Jewishness with banners and placards. Were they anti-Semites???

Included among them were Orthodox Jews, as in this photo :

Along the route there were 3 or 4 pro-Israeli Jews waving the Israeli flag and shouting pro-Israeli slogans. I was walking along side the Orthodox Jews and when they saw the 3 or 4 pro-Israeli counter-demonstrators they turned towards them pointing their fingers and chanted “shame on you” and “down with Israel”. It was truly heart-warming to see Jews standing up for Palestinians. It would be utterly ridiculous if only Jews were able to make a stand for Palestinians and anyone else was accused of being anti-Semitic. ffs

koldun Member

We all know he’s a lying sack of shit …..

Indeed. I’m not sure however how widespread that awareness is among the general public. I myself, despite being aware of his long history of lying, was surprised to learn recently just how far back it goes. Apparently he was sacked for lying when he was a young trainee journalist working for The Times newspaper. Lying appears to be deeply ingrained into his personality.

If nothing else this court case will focus attention to this aspect of his personality.

P-Jay

for me it was the “let’s give it to the NHS” part that was a lie, there was never £350bn to give to anyone, there wasn’t even £250bn in fact as we (remainers) all know in reality we’ll likely have to suffer more cuts as our GDP and tax revenue falls

Two points. Firstly we are not all Remainers. And secondly, there is an alternative opinion which claims that remaining in the EU will have a long term detrimental effect on the NHS.

I think you should read the whole post raybanwomble instead of small selected bits, it will give a much clearer picture of the points which you have apparently missed.

See dangeourbrains response – just because it hasn’t happened here yet doesn’t mean it won’t.

I did see dangeourbrains response, he claimed that it has happened in the past, and is happening again today elsewhere. It has never happened in the UK. Every single Home Secretary in UK for literally hundreds of years has come from the Tory, Labour, or Liberal Party.

Of course anything is possible, no one’s arguing that it isn’t. Nigel Farage could be installed as Prime Minister by a military coup, stranger things have happened in the world.

If we are going to have a purge we need to……

Who the hell is talking of “purges”??? Get a grip. We are talking about politicians being held accountable in law for deliberately lying to the public in relation to official government statistics, if they have indeed done that.

As I have already pointed out it is currently illegal for a politician to tell lies and if they do they may be held accountable by the courts. Here is an example of a politician being successfully taken to court for lying :

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/feb/06/ukip-mep-150000-libel-damages-to-labour-mps-rotherham

Was that the courts “moderating” or interfering in politics? I don’t recall an outcry over that particular case. Sure I recognise that it was under completely different legislation, well common law actually, but the moral principle (ie whether a politician can lie with impunity to achieve their political goals) remains the same.

And note this from the article : “In her defence, Collins argued that it was a political speech, which did not contain any allegation of fact, but merely expressed an opinion”

So her defence thought the issue was whether it was an “allegation of fact”. What’s a “fact”? Was the £350m a week a “fact” or an opinion? In the case of the UKIP MEP the court presumably decided that it was indeed an allegation of fact.

Let’s be clear, I accept very much that we are treading on potentially dangerous ground when we talk about taking politicians to court for lying, but that doesn’t mean that we should dodge the issue altogether. And let’s also be clear that we’re talking about deliberate repeated lies, which are deliberately designed to misinform and mislead the public and are presented as official government statistics/facts. And have real consequences, not trivial stuff which forms part of the normal rough and tumble of politics.

Sorry server error recurred before I could edit the grammar

In the same way it has happened in the past and is currently happening elsewhere in the world.

I’m not aware that it has ever happened in the past. When did the far-right infiltrate the judiciary in the Uk? The ‘elsewhere in the world’ example you give is Austria. In that situation the Interior Minister was a member of the Austrian Freedom Party, whose first leader was a former Nazi minister and SS officer.

When here in the UK we have a Home Secretary who is a member of the BNP or EDL I will worry about infiltration of the judiciary by the far-right. In the meantime don’t look for solutions to problems that don’t exist and are unlikely to exist in the near future.

Anyway getting back to Johnson’s alleged lies I guess the reality is that the private prosecution will almost certainly fail. If an attempt to prosecute Tony Blair for telling a bunch of lies to the British people to justify starting a war in which tens, if not hundreds, of thousands died failed, then what hope for a figure written on the side of a bus?

Still, nevertheless I welcome it and hopefully the fact that it’s gone much further than would normally be expected will make politicians think twice about causally misusing official statistics.

I’m reminded of a situation many many years ago when some local authority councillors were hauled before the courts for allegedly overspending. I can’t remember the precise details but it was at the time when the Tory government were at war with Labour local authorities over spending. I don’t think it was Liverpool or Lambeth though, the famous two.

The Labour councillors defence lay heavily on the claim that they were obliged to carry out the policies as they had been election commitments and they had a clear mandate for the people, and that to do otherwise would betray the trust placed upon by the electorate. The judge rejected that defence claiming that the “public expected politicians not to carry out their promises”.

Now whatever the rights and wrongs of that particular case what the judge was clearly doing was to legitimise politicians right to lie to the general public, which quite frankly was appalling. It would obviously be hugely beneficial if we were now to see a different attitude prevail.

Ok this thread was about why Farage is an MEP it’s rapidly turning it into another Brexit thread, if it continues there’ll be no choice but to close it. Take your EU discussion to rather large thread about it.

I don’t think I have ever agreed more with a moderating decision.

do you seriously trust coppers to moderate politics?

Not really, but not because I trust the courts any more.

We are not talking about “moderating” politics. We are talking about politicians being held legally accountable for abuse of public trust. We talking about politicians deliberately lying (allegedly) and misusing official statistics.

If government ministers are legally entitled to lie how much faith can you have in the Freedom of Information Act?

It’s obvious that the line has to be drawn somewhere, the question is where? In this particular case the courts will be deciding. They will decide whether it amounts to the abuse of the public’s trust. And quite right too.

BTW I have no idea how you think the far right will infiltrate the judiciary. If that becomes a problem then it will have to be tackled. In the meantime don’t look for solutions to problems that don’t exist and are unlikely to exist in the near future.

* edited because the paragraphs somehow got mixed up.

As much as I want to go to Boris’s sentencing for the comedy value – this probably sets a dangerous precedent

The problem about lying is that the more people get away with it the more they do it, it’s one of life’s lessons.

I personally believe that it is long overdue that politicians be held accountable for their lies. If this prosecution is successful it could result in cleaner and fairer politics.

Remember politicians at the present can’t tell straight forward lies about their opponents, there is no reason why this can’t be extended to facts and figures. And also remember that we’re not talking about small inconsequential lies here, we’re talking about major disinformation and abuse of the public’s trust.

Where do you draw the line? Or wouldn’t you – would you be happy to let politicians lie about unemployment figures, or homelessness, or security threats, etc ?

Yes I remember the Daily Mail headline Cougar, and to be fair it’s a good point. But I’m still not convinced that most people think the courts and judiciary are institutionally anti-Tory. Any more than I’m convinced that Daily Mail headline writers speak on behalf of most people. Or even believe what they say.

Ironic if the EU are racist to refugees …. when fear foreign refugees were weaponised by farage himself

It is indeed ironic that Remainers should dismiss Leavers as racists when the EU is inherently racist.

I also often find it ironic that Remainers call Leavers stupid..

@ernielynch I just want a brexit supporter to tell me some reasonable reasons for leaving Europe.

I can fully understand your frustration when the only person willing to engage appears to be chewkw. My advise to you akira would be to look somewhere other than a forum where apparently 99% of the punters backed remain.

“To dismiss roughly half the population as such”

It’s not even close to half the population.

So the UK is leaving the EU because all Leavers are “stupid and racist”? But wait, they’re not even close to half the population, how stupid does that make the Remainers?

I can’t think of any good reason why anyone should vote Tory. Should I therefore assume that there are no valid reasons for voting Tory?

I think you might confusing your opinions with other people’s opinions and being surprised when they don’t turn out to be the same.

I know people who can give me lots of good reasons why they voted to remain, I don’t however necessarily agree with them.

BTW if you read the above link you’ll see that the only fascists who had any sort of electoral success at that time was the Italian fascists. Today it is the Italian neo-Fascists who are mainly behind this :

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/migrant-crisis-eu-rescue-boat-rescue-hungary-italy-a8844001.html

I guess it’s occured to some of them that they could be stronger together. Perhaps unite under a common purpose and a common goal, for the greater good and all that. Cracking idea. Brilliant!!!!

Cracking idea? What it certainly isn’t, is a new idea.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Movement

“Europe a Nation
Mosley perceived a linear growth within British history and he saw Europe a Nation as the culmination of this destiny. Therefore, he argued that it was “part of an organic process of British history”, as Britain had united into one nation, and that it was Britain’s national destiny to unite the whole continent”

Well somafunk the context of your anger, which obviously I didn’t know about, is hugely relevant. I can indeed understand your anger. I am not of course going to make excuses or argue in favour of clearly inhumane and callous decisions. I shudder to think what chewkw might have deleted (I didn’t see it before it was deleted but I did read your response, also now deleted) I do hope despite what has happened that decisions are reversed and that medical needs and common humanity prevails.

Nevertheless there are widely held beliefs on here that anyone opposed to EU membership is stupid, worthless, and racist. To dismiss roughly half the population as such does supporters of the EU no favours. I too can get angry about the EU, an institution which I intense dislike. I don’t however translate anger against the EU and all its failings into hatred directed towards EU supporters.

In very much a reverse role I see the supporters of the EU as blind, ill-informed, and in denial. I have no wish to attempt to convince you, anyone attempting to do so on STW is pissing in the wind, as far as I’m concerned. The only thing that I am prepared to even attempt to do is to try to convince you that not all opponents of the EU are stupid racists. Although in reality I accept that this is almost certainly futile. Especially as the media’s sole attention for a long time has been focused on the small-minded bigots who shout the most.

I was going to give you an insight of where I’m coming from but on reflection I won’t bother. Ultimately it doesn’t matter if you consider me to be stupid and racist. And really looking at it from a purely practical point of view that attitude, imo, seriously undermines remainers and their cause.

N.B. FYI one of my strongest criticism of the EU is that I see it as inherently racist.

An interesting aspect of the whole Boris Johnson persona thing is the obvious contradiction it throws up.

It is a documented fact that the electorate has become increasingly disillusioned with politicians in recent decades. The single greatest criticism appears to be that politicians lie extensively.

Now Johnson is infamous for being a renowned liar, even by the standards of the political classes. Remarkably he has even been sacked from the Tory front bench for being a liar. Only a spectacular liar could be sacked from his job by a fellow politician from his own party for being a liar.

And yet despite all that Johnson appears to be one of the most popular politician with the electorate, how can that be possible? It completely contradicts what the public claim they want from a politician.

I guess the truth lies in the fact that his popularity in solely based on his appearance in TV programmes such as HIGNFY and the ‘amusing’ way he walks around with unkempt hair. He has never been exposed to any meaningful scrutiny.

Which is why I believe that if he does ever become leader of the Conservatives the intensive scrutiny he will undoubtedly be exposed to will destroy him. His past will come back to haunt him, his lies, his reckless vanity follies such as the Garden Bridge and the disastrous routmaster buses, his inability to provide any coherent political arguments, and his complete lack of idealogical commitment to anything. Ruffling up the hair and chuckling in an endearing way won’t be enough.

In reality Boris Johnson isn’t really a politician. He is just an attention-seeking clown who has simply used politics to satisfy his huge ego, provide the intense limelight that he undoubtedly craves, and also huge financial rewards.

I personally welcome his prosecution. Not because I dislike him, but because it is long overdue that politicians are held for account of their lies. I don’t think it will turn him into a “martyr”, most people recognise that the courts and judiciary are not institutionally anti-Tory. I have no doubt that the prosecution will only be successful if it is proven that Johnson did indeed lie and is guilty of an abuse of the public’s trust.

I have always believed that if your politics don’t reflect the truth you should change your politics, not the truth.

Btw that level of hatred and anger is something I associate with the EDL. Ironically.

Because a vast swath of the voting population are pig shit stupid piss pot racists.

Edit : that does a disservice to pig shit, given the arguments and reasoning i have heard for leaving the eu i’d rather give voting rights to a bucket of pig shit.

The inability of some remain supporters to make their point in a calm, reasonable, and measured way, simply re-enforces the belief that it’s best to switch off and not bother listening.

There’s plenty of other examples on here but I’ve yet to see a similar rant from a leave supporter. Although presumably they are all too thick to ride bikes.

About 5 or 6 years ago he got on the same bus as me. He boarded at Bromley and got off at Biggin Hill, near to where he lived. He went upstairs and was sitting downstairs.

Two things really surprised me, firstly I don’t know what happened when he went upstairs but when he boarded the bus he didn’t seem to draw any attention, when I nudged my friend and said “look, Nigel Farage “she replied “who?” Admittedly he wasn’t quite as high profile as he is today but the lack of reaction from other people quite surprised me, he was still a highly recognisable person.

The other thing that stunned me was the sheer nerve of Farage to stroll onto a bus unaccompanied, complete a reasonably long bus journey, and then casually stroll off. He was wearing some poncey posh striped blazer so it wasn’t exactly a stealth exercise, he was wearing the sort of clothes that loud people who want to be the centre of attention wear.

What made me feel extremely uncomfortable was the grudging respect I felt I had to repress as the result of seeing Nigel Farage take a bus home instead of a taxi, which he could obviously easily afford.

It was almost a case of “come and have a go if you think you’re hard enough”, not what I expected from Nigel Farage.

It was similar to the feeling I felt when I learnt of the compassion shown by Margaret Thatcher towards Eric Heffer when he was dying of cancer, it challenged everything I believed about the person. Well not really everything, I still thought he was a ****.

OK I’m going to leave it now. What started off as my take on the EU election results has now become a straight for or against the EU argument. It’s completely off-topic and there is already a thread for that.

Thatcherism (deliberately) raised unemployment… which has nothing to do with the UK joining the EEC.

Which of course makes my point. The answer is British government policy, not the EU. The EU is simply concerned that one country doesn’t have an unfair competitive advantage over others. It couldn’t give a monkeys how unfair a government is towards its citizens. The UK didn’t have to ask permission from the EU when it decided that someone with less than 2 years employment could legally be unfairly dismissed.

Tony Blair famously boasted “we will still have the most restrictive union laws in the Western world”, he was actually proud of that. Being a member of the EU didn’t stop the most restrictive union laws in the Western world.

Sorry I meant to say 1975, the year of the referendum. My mistake.

You mean the OPEC crises of 1973 wasn’t predicted in 1974?

And you’re right, the EEC/EU didn’t protect us from Thatcherism. I keep telling the europhiles that but they won’t listen, as they repeat the “worker’s rights” mantra. She was of course a firm remainer, a bit like you kelvin.

It is a perfectly sensible strategy to ask people who are opposed to the EU to vote for him.

Why wouldn’t it be?

Although the only circumstances I would ever consider voting for him would be if the other candidate was BNP. Or EDL or something similar.

Sorry but this is shite.
On the one hand we have future predictions. Normally done as a range from best case to worse case. Which is primarily what the remain campaign was guilty of.

Nah, if you make a prediction and it turns out to be a shite prediction it’s still shite. Even if you want to claim that it was just an honest mistake. Although I see it more as a politically motivated “honest mistake”

As I said, both sides have repeatedly talked shite, one side didn’t have a monopoly. And in the case of pro-Euro shite that goes way back. Before joining the EEC the europhiles claimed that joining would result in unemployment falling as it would lead to tens of thousands of extra jobs. It was almost certainly the single biggest thing which swayed people to support joining EEC.

What actually happened was that unemployment went through the roof after joining. And there it stayed, above the pre-EEC level, for 45 years. Until ironically this year, 3 years after Britain voted to leave, it has now come down for the first time to its the 1974 level.

And of course the present unemployment level brings me to more immediate shite. One month before the referendum the pro-EU British government claimed that a vote to leave, never mind actually leaving, “would represent an immediate and profound shock to our economy”.

Apparently the economy would be tipped into a year-long recession, with at least 500,000 jobs lost and GDP around 3.6% lower, following a vote to leave. I’m sure I don’t need point out that turned out to be shite too.

The reality is that you can produce forecasts to say whatever suits your political agenda. For example, remember the EU, well Germany actually, telling Greece that austerity, austerity, austerity, was the only solution? Well here’s a surprise:

https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-germany-economy-gdp/higher-state-spending-helps-german-economy-avoid-recession-in-fourth-quarter-idUKKCN1QB0N5

And here’s how compassionate the EU is towards people on their knees :

Germany earned €2.9 billion from Greece’s debt crisis

I could also mention the politically motivated bollocks said by a Treasury concerning UK austerity and budgetary deficit, and I might if you want, but to get back to my original point concerning Cameron’s melodramatic shite about the risk of war in Europe if Britain voted to leave in June 2016. I am indeed aware of what he actually said. He said :

“The serried rows of white headstones in lovingly tended Commonwealth war cemeteries stand as silent testament to the price this country has paid to help restore peace and order in Europe.”

And :

“From Caesar’s legions to the wars of the Spanish Succession, from the Napoleonic Wars to the fall of the Berlin Wall.

The moments of which we are rightly most proud in our national story include pivotal moments in European history. Blenheim. Trafalgar. Waterloo. Our country’s heroism in the Great War.”

He also went on to evoke the memories of Winston Churchill and Britain’s “lone stand” against Nazi Germany in 1940.

It is the sort of mind-numbingly pathetic rhetoric that I expect from Nigel Farage. Shite in other words.

I’ve read it now, and disagree with her, but still don’t care what she thinks.

Yeah but you’ve clicked on a link to an article in Guardian, and that’s what it’s about. If Germaine Greer had said that Leonardo da Vinci was a genius you wouldn’t have read her article in the Guardian. Job done.

By the way his flying machines were crap too. None of them managed to take off.
You can have that one on me for free.