R.I.P Britannia

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
Regional assistance is something the UK gov (of all colours - except for that extremely destructive Thatcherite period) has done since the end of WW2.
It has nothing to do with the EU or regional government, actually.

Sorry I misunderstood

I completely disagree with this comment. Tensions exist yes that is true but I do not believe for one moment that they are actually increasing at all.

I believe they are increasing
Far Right surges as Schr�der feels fury of the east

The east is envious of the west's wealth, and the west doesn't want to share


----

Governments negotiate agreements and sign up to them and then the people give their assent. How could it possibly work practically the other way?

I apologise, i was hasty , i ranted a bit too much, but look when our vote on the constitution is Vote 2006 , why not sooner!!!!! Because the result will be against the constitution.

(I am not meaning yourself here Wizard, just general comment I've seen) I have been amazed at the number of people who - of course

- claim not to support this man's views but think his 'treatment' (what threatment?!) 'unfair'.....whatever that's meant to mean.

He's being politically attacked because he is different and doesn't follow the views of the majority

If you (or a member of your family or circle of friends) were on the end of sweeping blind prejudice that took no account of you as an individual wouldn't you complain?

Would you not demand to know why people with such outrageous and unacceptable views were allowed to influence and exert their prejudices as if it were completely normal.....particularly if their views were well known beforehand?

Oh course, but everyone is entitled to their opinions not matter if that annoy or anger me. He wouldn't be able to politically attack homosexuals or he would of been hounded out by other members, but he wasn't even given a chance

Do you not know that since the end of WW2 (and long before the UK joined the EU) people that hold extreme political views and are members of extreme political parties have been sacked from the UK civil service, have been barred form the UK civil service and if discovered expressing those views publicly will be sacked from the civil service to this day?

I bet the far left weren't discriminated against
The right is always seen as extreme, people see right wing and say nazi which is BS, people need to remember that the left has a extreme as well.


[edit on 30-10-2004 by UK Wizard]

Originally posted by UK Wizard
I believe they are increasing
Far Right surges as Schr�der feels fury of the east

The east is envious of the west's wealth, and the west doesn't want to share

- Well I think you'll find that this is nothing like the story they're making out.

(It is the Telegraph afterall )

Notice how they stick to percentage figures and never mention the numbers of the actual vote.....just like they do in the UK when they want to frighten people about the BNP 'surge'......then you find out these huge percentage rises are actually related to votes numbering in the low hundreds or barely a thousand. Unpleasant and concerning, yes, but not quite the story they portrayed.

They do it all the time in German stories at that paper. A little while back it was exaggerated crap about Polish unrest as Germans attempt to buy back their old properties' in what is now western Poland and what was eastern Germany before WW2. It was rubbish based on a handful of accounts and hardly a wave sweeping Poland as they made out.

You should watch for it, the Telegraph - like the Mail - is really weird about Germany particularly and the EU in general......maybe they feel the need to be more anti because of their past?

(Having friends in Germany is a real antidote to this nonsense.....do you know anyone there? If they're into current affairs in any way they'd be far more reliable at telling you what's really going on.)
----

I apologise, i was hasty

, i ranted a bit too much, but look when our vote on the constitution is Vote 2006 , why not sooner!!!!! Because the result will be against the constitution.

- Why? There is no rush.

In any case we have (in all probability) a general election happening in the spring of 05.

If we do (and it appears pretty certain that is what they have been planning for) how could it realistically be organised before spring 06?

He's being politically attacked because he is different and doesn't follow the views of the majority

- No.

He is being refused appointment to a publicly funded and very important influential position where his views might well influence his decisions in an unacceptable manner. Given that much of that job is all about the decisions he might make this is clearly of great importance and relevant to the whole issue.

You never know he might even remain on the commission in a different post but the Justice position for such a bigot is just unacceptable.

Oh course, but everyone is entitled to their opinions not matter if that annoy or anger me.

- This guy is entitled to his private opinions no-one is denying him that.

The problem for him is that he has hardly kept them private and that therefore has consequences.

He wouldn't be able to politically attack homosexuals or he would of been hounded out by other members, but he wasn't even given a chance

- Why should any of us take this on trust?

Why should anyone have to be waiting for him to make an obviously unacceptable decision when he might well have made several subtle ones that went unnoticed anyway? What kind of a waste of time and effort is that when it could be so easily avoided by simply refusing him the post?

The man has already expressed his views publicly so why should anyone believe he would not use his position to express those opinions in policy decisions?

By the way, how does all of this square with the anti-EU myth of the all-powerful dictatorial EU Commission that no-one is supposed to be able to say boo too?

I bet the far left weren't discriminated against

- Bet away, but you are wrong. Membership of the communist party was heavily frowned upon.

The right is always seen as extreme,

- Well there's good reason for that, usually that is exactly what they are.

people see right wing and say nazi which is BS,

- In some cases that is true but nevertheless it is almost a 100% certainty (ok, that's an exaggeration but I believe it is found to be 'common') that those 'of the right' (by this in the context of the UK I mean beyond 'Conservative party type right) retain clear and usually pretty obvious sympathies and lurid and unhealthy interests and/or obsessions over some if not all of the nazi time in Germany.

people need to remember that the left has a extreme as well.

- True, but personally I don't really bother or worry too much with the distinction.

People can play 'my favourite colour' games as much as they like but IMO they're basically of the same cloth spouting the same - or very similar - crap.

IMO it all boils down to power-pervs who have come to the conclusion that they know best and that 'the herd' or 'the masses' are too stupid, slow or 'soft' to progress to any 'worthwhile future' (or avoid the danger we're 'sleep walking' toward)....and we're all too consumed by ourselves and our petty concerns to see it.

But, hey, luckily for us they can etc etc blah blah blah.

Whether you call them Communists, Nazi's, Neo-Cons or Islamic fundamentalists etc etc it's all the same thing under a different guise.

They're people who feel entitled to control other people rather than enable them and we can easily do without their malign influence in public life.







[edit on 30-10-2004 by sminkeypinkey]

Hopefully ATS will have a UK Politics Forum so more people will take part in this thread and bring some more opinions.

I still don't see the nessacity of the EU, the things it has accomplished could be accomplished outside. The EU is eventually going to conflict with the UN and Nato.

Why? There is no rush.

Think of all the changes that could take place between now and then...
2006 is along way away, I still think a vote on EU membership will see us withdraw from the EU.

[edit on 31-10-2004 by UK Wizard]

Forum is an excellent Idea... We could develop a kind of information archive for it so peoples debated are informed, there is nothing worse then people spouting off half truths and unfounded statments, making fools of them selves! Not talking about anyone in this post but we have all seen them...
Lets show how the brits can do it!

Originally posted by UK Wizard
Hopefully ATS will have a UK Politics Forum so more people will take part in this thread and bring some more opinions.

- Nice idea. Good one.

I'd also like to see it part of or linked to a EU/European forum so people from the continent could comment on their view of things too.

Afterall if people in the UK are going to pontificate about what Europe is supposed to be doing or like surely it is only fair to hear from the actual Europeans themselves?

I still don't see the nessacity of the EU

- If it were so unnecessary why do you think people bothered and still bother with it?

Why do you think the vast majority of 1950's and 1960's UK politicians were so desparate to achieve British admission and were so persistent in the face of the repeated obstacles thrown up before them as they tried?

(Many many of these people were already rich and had 'power' so it cannot have been for self-agrandisment)

Can you not see any point to it at all? Come on.

the things it has accomplished could be accomplished outside.

- Except they were not and never have been before.

Nice theory but there is absolutely no practical backing or demonstration of it at all.....in fact, particularly in Europe's case, quite the opposite, repeatedly.

Whereas the EU does actually exist and has nearly 40yrs of uniquely successful operation.

Frankly Wizard I'll take that actual reality (backed many many practical examples) over a theory based on wishful thinking(?), personal prejudices(?) and the many ton(ne )s of totally dodgy propaganda anyday.

The EU is eventually going to conflict with the UN and Nato.

- Why? Why should this follow?

The EU is almost all of NATO and it is a sizeable chunk of the UN (certainly most of the developed countries).

If what you really mean is that a self-assured EU will conflict with the USA, then fine. We probably will as we have done from time to time. So what?

Why not? Should we be a doormat for the USA?

Certainly the USA gives every indication (at the moment under the present regime) of not giving 'a flying one' what the European countries or the UN thinks about anything.....if you're looking for anyone demonstrating these worrying traits I'd suggest you turn your attention and worry about elsewhere Wizard.

Think of all the changes that could take place between now and then...

- ....and what? Such are the realities of life. What of it?

2006 is along way away,

- You surely cannot be serious that given that we have to have a general election by spring 2006 and will in all probability have that GE in spring/summer 2005 that we could really have a proper campaign for this referendum before the GE?

Sorry I do not see that as practical in any way at all.

......and I still don't see what you imagine is likey to happen in the meantime that makes a reasonable case for this referendum vote to happen sooner.

Of course the anti-EU crowd know that the coming Labour GE victory will undermine their position and that a proper unhurried and properly informative campaign will peel away significant parts of their support.

They know that as people become better informed about what this all really means and what is really going on their support dips.

Personally I consider the time taken to puncture several of the many myths (not to say outright lies about the EU) time very well taken.

I still think a vote on EU membership will see us withdraw from the EU.

- Well, as I said we shall see mate.

But again I ask you to consider the performance of Hague's tories in 2001. They did make the issue one of 'renegotiation and if not satisfactory to them then leaving the EU' and they were trounced, severely.

Just as Michael Howard is set to be trounced (he is currently polling worse that Hague or 'IDS') in the coming GE despite his pretending to be more UKIP than UKIP.

Europe and the EU is simply not the all consuming issue the anti-EU side think it is with the British public.

I have no more ability to see the future than you or anyone else Wizard but I can at least point to what historical precedent shows us and at every point (right up to the recent euro elections.....the single truth of which is a low turn-out rather than any real major surge of support in anti-EU vote.

(Remember to watch out for people who stick to messing about with only percentage figures and who stay well away from actual numbers?......it's a dead giveaway that one.)

[edit on 31-10-2004 by sminkeypinkey]