The paragraph at the end that turns what otherwise looks like a normal piece of journalism into typical British tabloid trash?Originally Posted by Loki
The paragraph at the end that turns what otherwise looks like a normal piece of journalism into typical British tabloid trash?
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Is there any other kind of British journalism?
Hope is the denial of reality
♫ It's the hard-knock Brexit for us, 'stead of treaty, we get tricked, it's the hard-knock Brexit for us♫
* cue hordes of signing orphans *
The light that once I thought compassion still casting shadows in your action
The words you shared were cold transactions that bring me to curse what you've done
When you're up there absorbed in greatness with such success you've grown complacent
I hope you scorch your many faces when you fly too close to the sun
From what I've read seems a positive and entirely sensible way forward from May today.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/01...at-eu-leaders/
Wow this changes everything omg
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
What you mean this changes everything? It's a simple admission of the plans being floated previously being unfeasible.
Congratulations America
Article is the usual crap: the author doesn't get that merely pleasing the home crowd isn't enough to actually get an agreement.
Congratulations America
An agreement that doesn't do anything about the reasons they voted to leave in the first place isn't enough either. I realize that you think "leave" only won because the only people who bothered to vote were a minority of racists but since you and the others are salivating over the idea of a punitive agreement that doesn't give the Brits anything they wanted in seeking to leave and strips them of those things they did have before, such an agreement is likely to not be enough even for those who voted to "remain."
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Well, the problem is that they come across as "Gimme, gimme!" while somewhat ignoring the fact that a trade means that both sides have to give something. Currently we're only seeing what they want. But there's absolutely no hint about what they want to give.
They are also ignoring the fact that they won't be able to get a better deal than Norway or Switzerland because for one, those two countries would (rightfully) be up in arms about that, among other reasons.
Plus, I'm somewhat doubtful about their basic ability to bargain. Considering that May managed to take a running jump on India's toes, for example.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
While I agree that the British govt. has never had the public mandate to agree to any deal that includes freedom of movement of persons, I think your remark misses your own point. Leavers wanted a number of different things and many of those wishes can be fulfilled under Brexit scenarios that include freedom of movement. Perhaps the only important goal that cannot be fully met in such a scenario is that most dear to the minority of racists you refer to below. If their desires are allowed to trump all other concerns then perhaps they can't rightly be viewed as an irrelevant minority.
No-one actually believes this. If nothing else, nearly half voted Remain, so clearly there must have been a large number of non-racists who bothered to voteI realize that you think "leave" only won because the only people who bothered to vote were a minority of racists
Really? "Salivating"? My wish was for a Brexit outcome where the UK would remain in the single market and the freedom of movement of persons would be preserved. The current most likely scenario is nothing to "salivate" over. It'd be like salivating over a pile of poo because poo's technically more edible than rocks. The notion that anyone here wants "a punitive agreement that doesn't give the Brits anything they wanted in seeking to leave" is also patent nonsense because no agreement can possibly accomplish that except one in which the UK agrees to re-join the EU. Leaving the EU automatically gives the UK many of the things Leavers wanted, including that which they said was their most important goal: a greater level of self-determinacy.but since you and the others are salivating over the idea of a punitive agreement that doesn't give the Brits anything they wanted in seeking to leave and strips them of those things they did have before
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
I was being sarcastic. The article is dumb. Most other articles about her speech have been better and it's unfortunate that RB chose to post the most useless one of the lot.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
That doesn't represent what I think at all. Also my reaction wat exclusively one about the ludicrous idea that to get an agreement all you need is to please the home crowd of one side. Especially if that side is the side that is the bigger benificiairy of any agreement.
Also, talk about 'punitive deals' is utter rubbish; not being a EU-member comes with not having EU-member privileges. No longer being an EU-member is what the Brits chose for. Whatever can be negotiated with the third country UK is dependent on whatever suits us, we are under no obligation defend the interests of the Brits.
Just like you don't allow for full state's rights for Puerto Rico because Puerto Ricans chose not to be part of the USA. I hope you remember you're putting that particular territory through the wringer for the 'mere technicality' that they aren't a state of the Union.
Last edited by Hazir; 01-17-2017 at 08:02 PM.
Congratulations America
Entirely sensible yes, positive not so much.
The light that once I thought compassion still casting shadows in your action
The words you shared were cold transactions that bring me to curse what you've done
When you're up there absorbed in greatness with such success you've grown complacent
I hope you scorch your many faces when you fly too close to the sun
Well, by doing away with the notion that the UK is keeping parts of participation in the internal market, there is actually a better chance of a deal that may limit some of the damage. That there will be damage seems a given to me.
Congratulations America
Nice one from here:
I think we should ask the Brexit experts ("This country has had enough of experts") in the Leave campaign what they thought of the Single Market?
"Only a madman would actually leave the market" - Owen Paterson, Tory Vote Leave campaigner
"Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the single market" - Daniel Hannan, Tory Vote Leave campaigner
"There's a free trade zone from Iceland to the Russian border and Britain will still be part of it after we vote leave." - Chris Grayling, Tory Brexit campaigner and current cabinet member
"There is no question about it, Britain will still have access to the single market after we vote leave" - Matthew Elliot, chief executive of the Vote Leave campaign
"Britain will stay in the single market whatever happens" - Pete North, pro-Brexit blogger
"Increasingly, the Norway option looks the best for the UK" - Arron Banks, Leave.EU founder and overwhelming UKIP donor
"Wouldn’t it be terrible if we were really like Norway and Switzerland? Really? They’re rich. They’re happy. They’re self-governing" - Nigel Farage, Leave.EU campaigner and UKIP leader at the time
"Norway, Switzerland, all of these countries have complete free trade with the EU, and by the way, I can't help noticing that they're doing pretty well." - Daniel Hannan, Tory Vote Leave campaigner.
So there you have it. We're not leaving the Single Market because nobody voted for it. Panic over! Wouldn't you trust all those people to not brazenly lie to you to merely score political points?
Me neither.
(With apologies to Another Angry Voice)
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
TBH you'd have to be pretty stupid to believe those promises. To start the people making the promises would never have been in a position to fulfill them, and also, merely pulling out of the command structure of the EU was a bit of the worst of both worlds. Which actually was a reason why I thought the Brits couldn't be stupid enough to choose that option (or Brexit as it was promoted by these people).
Congratulations America
Meanwhile you come across like. . . well like the group of kids in my 7th-grade science class during the frog dissection, who giggled while they cut the eyes out of the frog. As you say, a trade means both sides have to give something. Ditto for compromises in cases of disagreement. But you're too busy giggling at the idea of a those noisome Brits suffering in a "hard Brexit" to notice or acknowledge that you are, in fact, one of those two parties who still has to give something.
I don't think freedom of movement is just the domain of racism and racists and the "no compromise" attitudes demonstrated by the Europhiles on here goes far beyond just that area
[quote[Really? "Salivating"?[/quote]
Yeah, even you to an extent, though you're certainly NOTHING like as bad as Khend and Hazir.
Hazir has more than demonstrated that it's exactly what he wants, except with, you know, absolutely no decision-making participation allowed by the Brits. Restricted economic participation, full EU regulatory authority, free movement of persons, full dues (and without that rebate) etc.The notion that anyone here wants "a punitive agreement that doesn't give the Brits anything they wanted in seeking to leave" is also patent nonsense because no agreement can possibly accomplish that except one in which the UK agrees to re-join the EU. Leaving the EU automatically gives the UK many of the things Leavers wanted, including that which they said was their most important goal: a greater level of self-determinacy.
Not being an EU member doesn't mean a visa is required for tourism (I don't need a visa to take a vacation in Europe) but you and even Aimless were trumpeting about that as a possibility.
The fact that you seem to WANT that sort of relationship with the UK, reducing the former member to a territory under your full administration but possessing little to no representation in that administration, is why I'm in agreement with Rand that Brexit with no deal may actually be better than the kind of deal you want to insist on.Just like you don't allow for full state's rights for Puerto Rico because Puerto Ricans chose not to be part of the USA. I hope you remember you're putting that particular territory through the wringer for the 'mere technicality' that they aren't a state of the Union.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
We have visa regimes with all countries that pose a significant risk of its citizens abusing the waiver of visa requirements for reasons other than the intended one. The remark about visas was however an example of how the negative approach of the UK could lead to unexpected side effects.
Also taking the piss out of RB is something that he totally deserves given how he has these crazy Brexitanian notions of equality and entitlement wrt to the EU. Soon he's just another third country citizen with third country citizen status. If we don't ask him to get a visa that's because we grant it to him. Not because his UK citizenship comes with the privilege.
Finally, I don't care if they get a good deal. I care if we get a good deal. They are not our friends or partners. We do business with them or not. Depending on our needs first and foremost. If they benefit from such a deal that's fine with me. But again, it's not a priority I have.
Congratulations America
There are, however, some things we will not compromise on. The four freedoms are just that - non-negotiable. That's something Rand doesn't seem to comprehend. You may have*missed that bit in your approach from a high horse.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
You do realise Switzerland as repeatedly referenced is NOT a Single Market member? Whoops seems most of those quotes don't mean what you think.
Try this short video for some clarity.
https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DHE...z551KMDudizA8w
If I arrive in Paris and don't need a visa it will be because of my British citizenship. If I was an Iraqi or Somali I'd need a visa. Same as when I cross the pond.
As for whether you care or not whether you get a deal with your single largest export market and a nation you have a large export surplus with ... luckily you are not one negotiating.
I'm just happy no one here is actually involved in the negotiations to be honest
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
And that disproves my point exactly how, when I was just saying exactly that? Also, they do have free access to the single market for most of Switzerland's industry. Just not their banks. Yeah, The City would love that.
Also, whatever else you may think, those deals with Switzerlands took several decades. You're welcome to wait that long as well.
Only if your government actually manages to strike a deal. If you're going away without one you'll have to deal with visa issues. Oh, and you need to strike such deals with anyone - remember, the visa agreements you currently have are due to your membership in the EU. I'm sure India is waiting with bated breath for your proposals, what with May having been soooo charming to the Indian PM and all.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
Actually Littlefuzzy has consistently lived in the mistaken believe he was acting as an non-partisan third party in the whole Brexit mess. What he really did however was incessantly validate the nonsense Randblade spouted, as if his fantasies about Europe how it should be bore any link with reality and that we were merely talking about two equivalent and equally valid positions about what could be the outcome. Now he still doesn't want to see that there was no alternative, moderated EU on offer at any time and that Randblade was wrong to believe Brexit could be anything else than Brexit.
It explains his ludicrous claim we're out to punish the UK in the upcoming negotiations. We can't punish the UK through any negotiations. We can have a deal with them or we don't have a deal with them. But the deal will be made on the basis of no membership privileges first, then on concessions either side is willing to make. Because, Brexit is Brexit.
Congratulations America
Even if we were it would not make any difference for either process or outcome. Two sides will be interested in safeguarding their interests only.I'm just happy no one here is actually involved in the negotiations to be honest
Congratulations America
No, it doesn't depend on your British citizenship. It depends on the largesse of the French government and EU.
I said I don't care if the deal is good for you, I care if it's good for us.
Congratulations America
That list was implying that leavers were saying we wouldn't leave the Single Market which isn't way was said. Oh and you've just confirmed again that it's possible to have access to the Single Market for most of it without being members. Great.
Irrelevant. Those negotiations took place over time as these multiple regulatory regimes merged into one. We are starting off with the same regime as a starting point and deciding where to diverge from here. Completely the opposite.Also, whatever else you may think, those deals with Switzerlands took several decades. You're welcome to wait that long as well.
No they're not. We aren't a member of any Common Visa arrangements. Yes we are entering negotiations with India and I expect they'll be more plausible than your stillborn ones.Only if your government actually manages to strike a deal. If you're going away without one you'll have to deal with visa issues. Oh, and you need to strike such deals with anyone - remember, the visa agreements you currently have are due to your membership in the EU. I'm sure India is waiting with bated breath for your proposals, what with May having been soooo charming to the Indian PM and all.
Same as every deal ever made since time began.
I distinctly remembering telling you that having access is tied to the four freedoms. Which is exactly what Norway and Switzerland have to do. I didn't state anywhere anything about "membership". One other*thing you're regularly confused about.
And,*you're actually starting from zero with next-to-zero*knowledge on how to actually make such agreements. The learning process for your side will take considerably longer than the time you have left.
And the "negotiations with India will be more plausible"? With May having insulted the Indian PM when he asked about loosening the visa restrictions? Is this some kind of euphemism for "elephant in a china shop"?
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
That's generally the case in any negotiation, no?
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
You were going along with the notion that it would be different.
Congratulations America
We're not dealing with a member state, we're dealing with a previous member state. Which is not much different than a non-member state. Everything you get will be something you have to give something back for. And if we don't like the price you're offering you won't get it. As things stand, after Brexit you have no rights, no privileges, no nothing in the EU, EEA or the customs union. What you will maybe have is an agreement with the EU about trade.
Oh and the Indians demand more open access for their citizens in return for a trade agreement.
Congratulations America
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote