hwake@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> On May 5, 12:16 am, "John of Aix" <j.mur...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Blue wrote:
>>> Viejo Vizcacha wrote:
>>>> On May 3, 9:31 pm, sizy_one <sim...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Only tyrants and oligarchs together with die hard fascists left
>>>>> over from WW11 and out of date Marxists cream in their pants when
>>>>> the eu is mentioned.
>>
>>>> Not really. Anyone who is familiar with European history, knows
>>>> very well that Europeans were at each other throats for thousands
>>>> of years, and after WWII a few of them got together to start the
>>>> EU, with the basic objective of avoiding wars. Only war mongers and
>>>> suckers of Yankee cock would like to go back to the bad old days.
>>
>>> It goes something like, no one under 50 has had a vote on Europe.
>>
>> Nor on most things that form part of UK law and society. We don't
>> revote things everytime a new generation is born you know.
>>
>>> When we did get a vote it was for some called the 'common market'.
>>
>> No it was called the European Economic Community.
>
> A government pamphlet at the time of the referendum said "This
> pamphlet is being sent by the Government to every household in
> Britain. We hope that it will help you to decide how to cast your vote
> in the coming Referendum on the European Community (Common Market)."
Yep, the European Community, 'common market' was simply a term used by
the popular press and media, it has no legal status as an entity nor
ever did.
>>> Since then, with out any more referendum it's snowballed from
>>> some market to some united states of Europe.
>>
>> I hardly think 'snowballed' is the apposite word. It has been a long
>> and difficult process for the EU to get where it is.
>
> It has 'snowballed'. Snowballs get bigger by adding to the core. The
> EU has increased its powers by the use of acquis communitaire. Once
> it has powers, it never gives them up, just gradually takes over in
> more and more areas.
That is the case for every law and legal system. 'Snowballed' if you
like but 50 years is hardly rapid.
>>> A vote on this ever changing body is long overdue.
>>> Especially as this new treaty will allow polictians to totally
>>> ingor the British public. No more treaties will be needed.
>>> We will giving Europe permision to make new laws as it pleases.
>>
>> In case you are not aware of it, which you seem not to be, European
>> laws are suggested by the representatives of the member countries,
>> including the UK of course, and voted on by democratically elected
>> MEPs.
> “EU’s Lisbon Treaty Means Dictator****p”
> by Lord Christopher Monckton
A mere opinion with no more nor less value than any other, just
opinion.
>>> This is the last fight. That's why after this treaty was rejected
>>> so often it came back with a different name and the leaders just
>>> decided they wouldn't put it to the people of their respective
>>> nations.
>>
>> The Lisbon treaty has never been rejected. The proposed Constitution
>> was rejected. If you can't get your facts straight then sod off for
>> you have nothing useful to say.
>
> Are you naive, ignorant, or a liar? European leaders have said that
> the two are virtually the same - some 96% - the differences are
> insignificant, and they have said that the reason the new measure was
> called a treaty rather than a constitution was simply to avoid having
> to have the referendums that were promised on a 'constitution'.
Nevertheless the Lisbon treaty has never been rejected, you have to be
precise in these things, and whether or not there is a great deal of
common stuff in the treaty and the proposed constitution, the effects of
one and the other and the possibilities of change, opt-outs or rejection
are not at all the same between a treaty and a constitution.
> If it
> looks like a constitution, acts like a constitution, is treated like a
> constitution, then it IS a constitution.
Sadly not.
> Or, as some German said of
> the European army, which a British politician had called something
> else for his British audience because he didn't want to admit there
> was an EU army, "You can call it Margaret or Mary, but it's still a
> European Army".
There is no European army.
>>> Well that being so, European nations that out number Britain
>>> in many places including voting rights
>>
>> One nation only outnumbers the UK in voting rights and that is
>> Germany for the simple reason that its population is about a fifth
>> greater.
>>
>>> will go from 75% control
>>> of Britain to a 100%. How can you say US influence is worse
>>> than European total control is beyond me.
>>
>> I'd rather any eventuial outside influence come from people who share
>> the same culture, not from a land 5000 kilometres away that shares
>> very little of our outlook on the world and is pretty ignorant on
>> the whole.
>
> Why are you so keen on mass immigration of aliens - not least mozlems
> - then?
Where exactly have I said I am in favour of mass immigration? If you
can show me where then I'll send you a hundred pounds. I'm taking no
risk for I know exactly what I say and have said and have most
definitely never said that nor suggested it for I do not believe mass
immigration to be a good thing, especially when conducted in the
ludicrous manner it has been in the UK. But off you go, trawl through
the Usenet archives if you like, it'll keep you out of mischief.
>>> The 'common market' vote may well have been a pretext to peace
>>> in Europe, it's long term goal may well have been to make
>>> Britain some Switzerland. However, if Britian is to wave the
>>> white flag in the face of a European take over. Because that's
>>> what it is. We are saying no more fights, we're waving the white
>>> flag.
>>
>> Tosh, and BTW Britain is a large island that forms the major part of
>> the United Kingdom which includes this island, the offshore islands
>> and Northern Ireland. Britain is not the UK
>
> Oh dear. Britain is NOT a large island. Britain is England-and-
> Wales. Great Britain is England, Wales, and Scotland - ie the island.
> Do try to remember to call it GREAT Britain next time.
There is no 'Britain' on its own so one always assumes *Great* Britain
when the word is used. Your imagined entity 'Britain' made up of England
and Wales simply does not exist.
>>> If that is the case, then that is the argument that should be put
>>> to the people. We should have a referendum and our surrender to
>>> Europe.
>>
>> Only you and your loony friends consider it surrender, normal people
>> consider it political and social progress.
>
> Well no, normal people are very wary of the EU and certainly don't
> consider it political and social progress. Opinion polls show this.
Do they? I don't think they do unless you want to limit them to a tiny
section of the community. There are 450 million people in the EU and
just a few million moaners in the UK who think that it is some sort of
international plot to detroy their country. Mainly in England in fact,
one of the most politically backward countries in the Union with its
ridiculous, undemocratic electoral system, ignorant press and a
hierarchy based on birth.
>>> Otherwise the politcial elite will be know for ever more as
>>> those who sold Britain out, from under our noses, for our 'own
>>> good'. And they will be forever more hated for it.
>>
>> Dream on.
>
> You must live a very sheltered life.
Not at all, I'm sure I know far more of Europe and about Europe and
Europeans than you ever will.
>>> If the three main parties have so stitched up the system in Britain
>>> as to sell our souls to the Europeans then the people need some
>>> political monopolies commision.
>>
>> They can vote for the BNP or UKIP of course, or some other loony
>> party of
>> that ilk. Oh silly me, they have just done so with the magnificent
>> result of a whole ten or so council seats gained out of several
>> thousand possibles. Obvious then that the people of the United
>> Kingdom think they are the best thing since sliced bread.
>
> Alternatively they don't vote for small parties because they don't
> want to split the vote for a bigger party which is less objectionable
> than the one already in. That's the problem with FPTP.
The fact remains that they don't vote for these parties therefore as far
as political life is concerned they are of no consequence whatever
except as an Aunt Sally to have a laugh at.
|
