EU referendum results live: Brexit most likely outcome says leading pollster
Welcome to Perspectives. We hope you enjoy your visit.
You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
We'll see how much responsibility those people can handle in real life since they have used millions of lies to the British people to get some personal gain.
Just for the record, ...name just one lie, OK? With me? And we'll debate your 'greatest lie.' OK?
Next...
Quote:
Nigel Farage will kill himself because he will not be able to face the realities of what Brexit is likely to cause in the long term. He has already proven that he's not a person who is able to have ANY kind of responsibility of anything at all in his political life. Just causing a commotion was all that UKIP is capable of -
Kill himself? He's no longer relevant, he's resigned. Versteh? Now, I want you to view (see above) the ENTIRE Brexit video I posted. All of it. Take notes, then tell us why and where you disagree. OK?
This outta be good.....
Mozart
What stops you from finding Boris Johnson's posts yourself what he has written about the EU for years in e.g. The Daily Telegraph as a Brussel correspondent? Your values and idealogy, which affect your attitudes?
No, it is NOT my job to hunt down and bring about posts of his lies when it is part of the man himself, and of his values and ideologies which are common across the globe. That is not the way how intelligent behaviour works when you are able to question your own beliefs.
But to help you forward, here's a few posts how he has to change his writings and his attitudes now that he's in charge of Foreign Secretary:
Although, as in Finland's case, it doesn't mean he will not stop telling lies to his supporters in some other ways when talking to his supporters for personal gain (probably his Facebook posts) . That kind of behaviour will most likely be part of his character in the future as well.
The news I've read about doesn't mean that Nigel Farage will drop out on political career. He will be held responsible for his acts as a person in the press. I recall reading that there are some policians in the UK who have killed themselves later on in life because of the blunders made in their career.
Nigel Farage dropping the leadership of UKIP has the very potential of being parallel to G.W.Bush saying "Mission accomplished", which has lead to creation of Isis, far more dangerous than Al-Qaeda ever has been. The real work of the cause of Brexit hasn't really even begun yet. It will takes years to see the effects but in the US case, it has and will still cost billions of dollars to the US taxpayers. How the debt is handled, is another subject but related to the foreign policy as in England's case as well.
To answer your video post in thorough details would require for me to write a post of dozens of pages of how that man believes in the lies of many of the way too conservative British Press news publications throughout the years. But to get a few realities of this world of ours through: He has an extremely narrow view of the changed world, of what the EU is, what does it represent in the globalized world, and how it actually works. The person doesn't understand the reasons how and why the globalism, build by us WESTERN COUNTRIES OURSELVES, requires changes from the nationalistic values we WESTERN COUNTRIES OURSELVES have also build in the past centuries. His "peace sign" at the end is pathetic one. He doesn't understand who is "the enemy" in our changed world. By the expressions he uses in his speech, he believes in uber nationalism and nothing can change his values any more in his life.
BTW, I'm getting closer to 50 years already, and I've lived much of my life in an already globalised world with constructive values and constructive attitude in real life. I don't blame the world for changing as it has done so since the existense of the universe, including the human knowledge of it.
Getting a short introduction to how democracies can also work:
"The European Parliament has the right to approve and dismiss the European Commission. Since 1994, commissioners-designate have been required to appear before an EP hearing. Under the Lisbon Treaty, EU heads of state propose a candidate for Commission President, taking into account the results of European elections. The candidate is elected by the EP." "Parliament can ask the Court to take action against the Commission or Council if they have acted in a way that is contrary to the spirit of EU law."
European people elect the MEPs (=Member of the European Parliament). So, the Commission is indirectly elected. I do agree that the representatives of the European Commission needs to accept that
For some more information how this works and where else indirect election is used: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indirect_election Do you recognize both in the US and in the UK how indirect election works and is used in our world today? Another question is, should any of those be changed. If you want them changed, could you explain why?
(Sorry, this sentence was unfinished from my previous post: )
I do agree that the representatives of the European Commission needs to accept that the red tape needs to be still cut down the level of bureaucracy but the MEPs have a major role in the process.
He doesn't need to name it. The European Commission keeps a database of these "EuroMyths" (= lies) a genre apparently invented by Boris Johnson himself when he was correspondent for the Telegraph from Brussels in the ninties. This has been going on since 1992, and ultimately has led to Brexit.
Sadly if those who have control of the media keep repeating lies over and over again for decades, they can turn those lies into the truth, at least for the majority of people. Berlusconi did exactly the same in Italy, and based all his political career over his control of the Italian TV. Just as the UK press barons managed to convince the public that the EU is 'corrupt' and 'unreformable', Berlusconi managed to convince the public that the judges who were trying to prosecute and convict him were 'biased' and 'politically motivated'.
Oh Puhleaze....!
Coward..! Wimp....! Wuss.....!
I asked for one lie, and you give me a blog SPONSORED by the EU? Really?
The EU’s law-making process is fundamentally undemocratic. Power is vested in the unelected and unaccountable elite who make laws - in secret - to preserve the status of large multinationals at the expense of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Multinationals achieve their preferential status by spending enormous sums of money on lobbying. They create a complicated regulatory framework, which only large companies with their Human Resources departments can comply with. This drives small competitors out of business, destroys competition and encourages monopolies, forcing the consumer to pay a higher price for poorer quality goods and services.
There are four key institutions of the EU: the European Commission, European Parliament, European Council and the Court of Justice of the EU. Each institution supposedly represents separate interests. The Commission represents the EU, the Parliament represents the people, the Council represents the Governments of each Member State and the Court interprets the law. However, these institutions do not do this in practice, as they all represent large multinationals and an integrationist agenda, as the intention is to create a federal United States of Europe. This new country already has a flag, a Parliament, an anthem, Presidents, currency, a legal system, legal status and a navy - to name just a few.
The EU Commission is the guardian of the treaties and enforces EU law. More importantly, this means it is the Government of Europe which has the sole right to propose the laws which increasingly encroach on our lives here in Britain.
The Commission is made up of 28 unelected commissioners, who cannot be held to account. Each commissioner has a specific policy area in which to create laws. The Commission has a President (currently Jean-Claude Juncker); unlike the other 27 commissioners he is personally elected by the European Parliament, however his was the only name on the ballot paper, not exactly democratic. The Commission is advised by the Directorate General, which along with the Commission is heavily lobbied. Once the Commission proposes an EU law, this proposal is taken to the Parliament.
OK, OK, ...here's a second....
Quote:
Secondly, the Parliament is made up of 751 MEPs who are elected by the people in EU Member States every five years in elections. National parties arrange themselves into European groups of similar parties throughout Europe. It also has a President (currently Martin Schulz) who was voted in by the Parliament, but once again he was the only candidate. Theoretically, the Parliament has the ability to remove the Commission; however the Parliament has never successfully been able to remove it - even when the Commission has been full of corrupt cronies. The Parliament didn’t even remove the commission of 2004 to 2009 which was full of questionable characters. This Commission included Siim Kallas the Anti-Fraud Commissioner who was given this role despite being charged with fraud, abuse of power and providing false information after £4.4million disappeared while he was head of Estonia’s national bank.
This is not a Parliament in any real sense, as they have no right to propose laws. Instead it is a façade, created to make the EU look democratic, rather than give the public a choice over those who makes their laws. The Parliament does vote and can make amendments on laws proposed by the Commission, but the Commission must accept any of the amendments proposed for the changes to become effective, showing where the power lies.
Additionally, once something becomes an EU law, the Parliament has no ability to propose a change to this law. All the power is given to the Commission. It is clear the public’s elected representatives do not matter in the EU. It’s a ‘club’ to push through laws which would be rejected by national Parliaments. Once the Parliament approves an EU proposal, it is sent to the European Council.
See? I put two points on the board for debate, not millions and not a blog from EU's version of Pravda. Two.
"The European Council defines the EU's overall political direction and priorities. It is not one of the EU's legislating institutions, so does not negotiate or adopt EU laws.
Sadly if those who have control of the media keep repeating lies over and over again for decades, they can turn those lies into the truth, at least for the majority of people. Berlusconi did exactly the same in Italy, and based all his political career over his control of the Italian TV. Just as the UK press barons managed to convince the public that the EU is 'corrupt' and 'unreformable', Berlusconi managed to convince the public that the judges who were trying to prosecute and convict him were 'biased' and 'politically motivated'.
Oh Puhleaze....!
Coward..! Wimp....! Wuss.....!
I asked for one lie, and you give me a blog SPONSORED by the EU? Really?
The EU’s law-making process is fundamentally undemocratic. Power is vested in the unelected and unaccountable elite who make laws - in secret - to preserve the status of large multinationals at the expense of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Multinationals achieve their preferential status by spending enormous sums of money on lobbying. They create a complicated regulatory framework, which only large companies with their Human Resources departments can comply with. This drives small competitors out of business, destroys competition and encourages monopolies, forcing the consumer to pay a higher price for poorer quality goods and services.
There are four key institutions of the EU: the European Commission, European Parliament, European Council and the Court of Justice of the EU. Each institution supposedly represents separate interests. The Commission represents the EU, the Parliament represents the people, the Council represents the Governments of each Member State and the Court interprets the law. However, these institutions do not do this in practice, as they all represent large multinationals and an integrationist agenda, as the intention is to create a federal United States of Europe. This new country already has a flag, a Parliament, an anthem, Presidents, currency, a legal system, legal status and a navy - to name just a few.
The EU Commission is the guardian of the treaties and enforces EU law. More importantly, this means it is the Government of Europe which has the sole right to propose the laws which increasingly encroach on our lives here in Britain.
The Commission is made up of 28 unelected commissioners, who cannot be held to account. Each commissioner has a specific policy area in which to create laws. The Commission has a President (currently Jean-Claude Juncker); unlike the other 27 commissioners he is personally elected by the European Parliament, however his was the only name on the ballot paper, not exactly democratic. The Commission is advised by the Directorate General, which along with the Commission is heavily lobbied. Once the Commission proposes an EU law, this proposal is taken to the Parliament.
OK, OK, ...here's a second....
Quote:
Secondly, the Parliament is made up of 751 MEPs who are elected by the people in EU Member States every five years in elections. National parties arrange themselves into European groups of similar parties throughout Europe. It also has a President (currently Martin Schulz) who was voted in by the Parliament, but once again he was the only candidate. Theoretically, the Parliament has the ability to remove the Commission; however the Parliament has never successfully been able to remove it - even when the Commission has been full of corrupt cronies. The Parliament didn’t even remove the commission of 2004 to 2009 which was full of questionable characters. This Commission included Siim Kallas the Anti-Fraud Commissioner who was given this role despite being charged with fraud, abuse of power and providing false information after £4.4million disappeared while he was head of Estonia’s national bank.
This is not a Parliament in any real sense, as they have no right to propose laws. Instead it is a façade, created to make the EU look democratic, rather than give the public a choice over those who makes their laws. The Parliament does vote and can make amendments on laws proposed by the Commission, but the Commission must accept any of the amendments proposed for the changes to become effective, showing where the power lies.
Additionally, once something becomes an EU law, the Parliament has no ability to propose a change to this law. All the power is given to the Commission. It is clear the public’s elected representatives do not matter in the EU. It’s a ‘club’ to push through laws which would be rejected by national Parliaments. Once the Parliament approves an EU proposal, it is sent to the European Council.
See? I put two points on the board for debate, not millions and not a blog from EU's version of Pravda. Two.
"The European Council defines the EU's overall political direction and priorities. It is not one of the EU's legislating institutions, so does not negotiate or adopt EU laws.
Jar
As the UK has voted out, this is for academic curiosity only ... If the EU is democratic, why can't European citizens vote for people who can change EU policies? Please answer in your own words.
Isn't it true to say the EU can never be democratic? It's too big and too diverse. Nothing would ever get done if it was.
Politicians the world over lie and they'll always need careful watching and Boris is no exception. Are bureaucrats with immense power and beyond democratic accountability to be trusted?
However, Boris is an intelligent, multi-lingual man, despite his clown's persona, and well suited to the Foreign Office. His 'approval ratings' were consistently higher than his chief rival and remain (in the EU) chief David Cameron. Make what you like of that! He was also Mayor of London with its 8m population. (Isn't that nearly twice the size of Finland's entire population?) He also controlled London's £17bn yearly budget as Mayor. I'd say he looked after London pretty well, so for me at least he has proved his worth so far.
We hope for a mutually agreeable relationship with EU states after Brexit.
Nan Tucks Ghost
"Reports from all sides prior to referendum debate were generally pretty dire, but a much more accurate case for Brexit was made in the crowdfunded 'Brexit the Movie'. I presume you've watched it? Did you spot any lies in it? If so, what do you think they are?"
He has the charisma so many politicians lack, to actually pull this off.
What do you need in your personal life in order discover that you don't need some politician to be the source of the admiration you need in your life?
UKIP = The Basic Finns = "The answer to one's personal problems in life"?
Like I read hundreds of posts years ago in several net publications that some people wished that Timo Soini, who's the basic founder The Basic Finns, that he will fix all the problems those people are having in their lives?
I wonder why are you alive?
Personal view of what I know of British political scene: Nigel Farage will kill himself because he will not be able to face the realities of what Brexit is likely to cause in the long term. He has already proven that he's not a person who is able to have ANY kind of responsibility of anything at all in his political life. Just causing a commotion was all that UKIP is capable of - just like the Basic Finns did - after becoming part of the actual world in a democracy responsible of what they are representing.
IF UKIP is capable of surviving the change ongoing in the UK - without destroying the hundreds of years of history of the existence of the UK when Scotland and North Ireland have already stated that they wish to remain in the EU - and without resorting to political pressure and/or violence against Scotland and North Ireland, then maybe England is able to learn something from its history.
But I don't have any such hopes, understanding the basics of the ideologies behinds those which resulted to the Brexit.
Now, Hiawatha, you need to take the responsibility of your own life as well of yourself because you will have not a single outside source of problems to blame on except British internal ones (well, except any other multi-national organizations such as NATO and the UN). Your personal problems will not change with the Brexit, no matter how much you wished they would change.
Are Scotland and Northern Ireland an overall asset or liability to the British economy ???...Do the Scots and the Irish think they will get better government benefits by being part of the EU ???... Do they think they would have a greater political voice being in the EU ???...How much in common do they have with Greece ???................
"The European Council defines the EU's overall political direction and priorities. It is not one of the EU's legislating institutions, so does not negotiate or adopt EU laws.
Jar
As the UK has voted out, this is for academic curiosity only ... If the EU is democratic, why can't European citizens vote for people who can change EU policies? Please answer in your own words.
Isn't it true to say the EU can never be democratic? It's too big and too diverse. Nothing would ever get done if it was.
Politicians the world over lie and they'll always need careful watching and Boris is no exception. Are bureaucrats with immense power and beyond democratic accountability to be trusted?
However, Boris is an intelligent, multi-lingual man, despite his clown's persona, and well suited to the Foreign Office. His 'approval ratings' were consistently higher than his chief rival and remain (in the EU) chief David Cameron. Make what you like of that! He was also Mayor of London with its 8m population. (Isn't that nearly twice the size of Finland's entire population?) He also controlled London's £17bn yearly budget as Mayor. I'd say he looked after London pretty well, so for me at least he has proved his worth so far.
We hope for a mutually agreeable relationship with EU states after Brexit.
Nan Tucks Ghost
"Reports from all sides prior to referendum debate were generally pretty dire, but a much more accurate case for Brexit was made in the crowdfunded 'Brexit the Movie'. I presume you've watched it? Did you spot any lies in it? If so, what do you think they are?"
(From 16 July)
I'd still like to know what you thought of it.
You're answering as if the US way of handling its policies is the only possible way, right? So how does the US change is policies and which policies you are referring to? Domestic and/or foreign ones? Do you mean the foreign policy of the US has a possibility to change every 4 years, even though the current US doctrine is derived from the WW2 era and the aftermath?
Any kind of "common European foreign policy" will not come true for a while yet as the NATO is involved in the majority of the European countries and the most of national leaders do not want to start a rivalry defence organization at this time (although there could have been an opportunity to start in the last decade when NATO was in trouble).
Because the EU was itself built upon avoiding war waging with the European regions, I just don't see that the EU would become just another force with the basics of any kind of traditional empire. The 2 world wars did teach Europe something but there are still these nationalistic people and forces who want to believe it will solve "all the problems in the world (and their personal lives - even psychologically)".
I don't believer Boris Johnson is capable of keep acting his according to his traditional character as being all against the EU. He needs to be in charge of his position and keep his word to whom he is dealing with. He can't lie any more to the colleagues he needs to deal with but needs to face them face-to-face of the very persons he's been judging against (by telling thousands of lies). Otherwise, it will backfire to the English citizens, causing much more millions of British people misery if trying to play too much games with the realities of the forces existing in this changed world with the globalísm as a reality and British Empire gone. Brexit means Brexit. British people needs to deal with it and try to rely on the WW2 era not existing any longer.
He has the charisma so many politicians lack, to actually pull this off.
What do you need in your personal life in order discover that you don't need some politician to be the source of the admiration you need in your life?
UKIP = The Basic Finns = "The answer to one's personal problems in life"?
Like I read hundreds of posts years ago in several net publications that some people wished that Timo Soini, who's the basic founder The Basic Finns, that he will fix all the problems those people are having in their lives?
I wonder why are you alive?
Personal view of what I know of British political scene: Nigel Farage will kill himself because he will not be able to face the realities of what Brexit is likely to cause in the long term. He has already proven that he's not a person who is able to have ANY kind of responsibility of anything at all in his political life. Just causing a commotion was all that UKIP is capable of - just like the Basic Finns did - after becoming part of the actual world in a democracy responsible of what they are representing.
IF UKIP is capable of surviving the change ongoing in the UK - without destroying the hundreds of years of history of the existence of the UK when Scotland and North Ireland have already stated that they wish to remain in the EU - and without resorting to political pressure and/or violence against Scotland and North Ireland, then maybe England is able to learn something from its history.
But I don't have any such hopes, understanding the basics of the ideologies behinds those which resulted to the Brexit.
Now, Hiawatha, you need to take the responsibility of your own life as well of yourself because you will have not a single outside source of problems to blame on except British internal ones (well, except any other multi-national organizations such as NATO and the UN). Your personal problems will not change with the Brexit, no matter how much you wished they would change.
Are Scotland and Northern Ireland an overall asset or liability to the British economy ???...Do the Scots and the Irish think they will get better government benefits by being part of the EU ???... Do they think they would have a greater political voice being in the EU ???...How much in common do they have with Greece ???................
Why would you be concern about the existence of the UK?
You need to ask the Scots and the Irish, including the people of the Northern Ireland why they would want to stay in the EU. I would think they will partly understand that the world has changed and the EU exists to protect them to exist in the globalized world, even if it the current EU is not behaving as the most efficient way as any kind of governmental structure is not easily adapting to every kind of change in the world.
The EU has become the scapecoat for basically everything what is wrong in the world (like globalism) and in the internal problems of each EU country because it's the only tangible organization to blame on after the discovery globalism in the way it is existing today after the technological discoveries allowing it to exist and spread easily.
Are Scotland and Northern Ireland an overall asset or liability to the British economy ???...Do the Scots and the Irish think they will get better government benefits by being part of the EU ???... Do they think they would have a greater political voice being in the EU ???...How much in common do they have with Greece ???................
Why would you be concern about the existence of the UK?
You need to ask the Scots and the Irish, including the people of the Northern Ireland why they would want to stay in the EU. I would think they will partly understand that the world has changed and the EU exists to protect them to exist in the globalized world, even if it the current EU is not behaving as the most efficient way as any kind of governmental structure is not easily adapting to every kind of change in the world.
The EU has become the scapecoat for basically everything what is wrong in the world (like globalism) and in the internal problems of each EU country because it's the only tangible organization to blame on after the discovery globalism in the way it is existing today after the technological discoveries allowing it to exist and spread easily.
Would it be better if the Brits kick Scotland and Northern Ireland out of Great Britain ???....The EU could need another Greece..............
"The European Council defines the EU's overall political direction and priorities. It is not one of the EU's legislating institutions, so does not negotiate or adopt EU laws.
Jar
As the UK has voted out, this is for academic curiosity only ... If the EU is democratic, why can't European citizens vote for people who can change EU policies? Please answer in your own words.
Isn't it true to say the EU can never be democratic? It's too big and too diverse. Nothing would ever get done if it was.
Politicians the world over lie and they'll always need careful watching and Boris is no exception. Are bureaucrats with immense power and beyond democratic accountability to be trusted?
However, Boris is an intelligent, multi-lingual man, despite his clown's persona, and well suited to the Foreign Office. His 'approval ratings' were consistently higher than his chief rival and remain (in the EU) chief David Cameron. Make what you like of that! He was also Mayor of London with its 8m population. (Isn't that nearly twice the size of Finland's entire population?) He also controlled London's £17bn yearly budget as Mayor. I'd say he looked after London pretty well, so for me at least he has proved his worth so far.
We hope for a mutually agreeable relationship with EU states after Brexit.
Nan Tucks Ghost
"Reports from all sides prior to referendum debate were generally pretty dire, but a much more accurate case for Brexit was made in the crowdfunded 'Brexit the Movie'. I presume you've watched it? Did you spot any lies in it? If so, what do you think they are?"
(From 16 July)
I'd still like to know what you thought of it.
You're answering as if the US way of handling its policies is the only possible way, right? So how does the US change is policies and which policies you are referring to? Domestic and/or foreign ones? Do you mean the foreign policy of the US has a possibility to change every 4 years, even though the current US doctrine is derived from the WW2 era and the aftermath?
Any kind of "common European foreign policy" will not come true for a while yet as the NATO is involved in the majority of the European countries and the most of national leaders do not want to start a rivalry defence organization at this time (although there could have been an opportunity to start in the last decade when NATO was in trouble).
Because the EU was itself built upon avoiding war waging with the European regions, I just don't see that the EU would become just another force with the basics of any kind of traditional empire. The 2 world wars did teach Europe something but there are still these nationalistic people and forces who want to believe it will solve "all the problems in the world (and their personal lives - even psychologically)".
I don't believer Boris Johnson is capable of keep acting his according to his traditional character as being all against the EU. He needs to be in charge of his position and keep his word to whom he is dealing with. He can't lie any more to the colleagues he needs to deal with but needs to face them face-to-face of the very persons he's been judging against (by telling thousands of lies). Otherwise, it will backfire to the English citizens, causing much more millions of British people misery if trying to play too much games with the realities of the forces existing in this changed world with the globalísm as a reality and British Empire gone. Brexit means Brexit. British people needs to deal with it and try to rely on the WW2 era not existing any longer.
"You're answering as if the US way of handling its policies is the only possible way, right? ..."
Wrong. I'm not interested in any ruling body which is not democratic, and to you that equates to 'must want to do things the American way'? That's quite an impressive but groundless leap in logic you've made there.
The Common Foreign and Security policy (CFSP) is already 'true' and it's evolving under the European External Action Service - link below, but you can stick your head in the sand and pretend it isn't if it makes you feel better. Even if it doesn't evolve soon, do you think we should hang around just in case it isn't an expensive xxxx up like most other things the EU gets its claws into?
European integration has been the dream of European nationalists for hundreds of years, even the UK's own resident fascist, Sir Oswald Mosley, wanted a united Europe, but their dream has been turned into reality for the betterment of politicians, bureaucrats, bankers and multinationals, though a few crumbs have been thrown to the plebs. EU supporters have some odd ideas about what leavers want from Brexit. (And globalism is a reality; it really isn't in dispute. That's just a non sequitur you've slipped in.)
The Prime Minister is in charge of Johnson's position, and you're free to distrust him, even though you can't vote for or against him, but what lies has Johnson told? Please don't refer back to your list of Euromyths from the EC unless you can be more specific. He certainly wasn't responsible for all those. He didn't even work for the majority of those sources! For every 'lie' you can produce I can produce more from EU supporters. You see, all politicians do lie. It's laughable that EU supporters whinge when their own lying tactics are used even mildly against them. (The remain camp even wheeled out one of our former prime ministers like he was some kind of wise elder statesman. He is anything but, having been a huge EU supporter and even wanted Russia to join, and the UK to join the euro. He tried to promote a moral vision for the UK while, it later transpired, that he'd been having an affair with one of his own colleagues!)
I very much hope that Brexit means Brexit, and British people will deal with it, though our duplicitious political class might feel differently and try to avoid Brexiting for as long as they possibly can. If that happens, you can be sure this will rumble on and on. No one wants that, so I hope politicians accept Brexit as the reality. And the idea that we leavers want the WW2 (or Empire) era back, or that we expect Brexiting will put everything right are more of those odd ideas you EU supporters psychologically cling to.
I'll ask one more time, more in hope than in expectation, about what you think about 'Brexit, the movie'. I realise it and the link I posted above confront your prejudices, but if you're going to close your mind to any argument that's difficult to deal with we can't engage in any meaningful debate. There's no rush to reply. I'd rather you watched it carefully, then replied, rather than with the usual knee-jerk stuff I've come to expect from you. PLEASE.
We'll see how much responsibility those people can handle in real life since they have used millions of lies to the British people to get some personal gain.
Just for the record, ...name just one lie, OK? With me? And we'll debate your 'greatest lie.' OK?
Next...
Quote:
Nigel Farage will kill himself because he will not be able to face the realities of what Brexit is likely to cause in the long term. He has already proven that he's not a person who is able to have ANY kind of responsibility of anything at all in his political life. Just causing a commotion was all that UKIP is capable of -
Kill himself? He's no longer relevant, he's resigned. Versteh? Now, I want you to view (see above) the ENTIRE Brexit video I posted. All of it. Take notes, then tell us why and where you disagree. OK?
This outta be good.....
Mozart
What stops you from finding Boris Johnson's posts yourself what he has written about the EU for years in e.g. The Daily Telegraph as a Brussel correspondent? Your values and idealogy, which affect your attitudes?
No, it is NOT my job to hunt down and bring about posts of his lies when it is part of the man himself, and of his values and ideologies which are common across the globe. That is not the way how intelligent behaviour works when you are able to question your own beliefs.
But to help you forward, here's a few posts how he has to change his writings and his attitudes now that he's in charge of Foreign Secretary:
Although, as in Finland's case, it doesn't mean he will not stop telling lies to his supporters in some other ways when talking to his supporters for personal gain (probably his Facebook posts) . That kind of behaviour will most likely be part of his character in the future as well.
The news I've read about doesn't mean that Nigel Farage will drop out on political career. He will be held responsible for his acts as a person in the press. I recall reading that there are some policians in the UK who have killed themselves later on in life because of the blunders made in their career.
Nigel Farage dropping the leadership of UKIP has the very potential of being parallel to G.W.Bush saying "Mission accomplished", which has lead to creation of Isis, far more dangerous than Al-Qaeda ever has been. The real work of the cause of Brexit hasn't really even begun yet. It will takes years to see the effects but in the US case, it has and will still cost billions of dollars to the US taxpayers. How the debt is handled, is another subject but related to the foreign policy as in England's case as well.
To answer your video post in thorough details would require for me to write a post of dozens of pages of how that man believes in the lies of many of the way too conservative British Press news publications throughout the years. But to get a few realities of this world of ours through: He has an extremely narrow view of the changed world, of what the EU is, what does it represent in the globalized world, and how it actually works. The person doesn't understand the reasons how and why the globalism, build by us WESTERN COUNTRIES OURSELVES, requires changes from the nationalistic values we WESTERN COUNTRIES OURSELVES have also build in the past centuries. His "peace sign" at the end is pathetic one. He doesn't understand who is "the enemy" in our changed world. By the expressions he uses in his speech, he believes in uber nationalism and nothing can change his values any more in his life.
BTW, I'm getting closer to 50 years already, and I've lived much of my life in an already globalised world with constructive values and constructive attitude in real life. I don't blame the world for changing as it has done so since the existense of the universe, including the human knowledge of it.
Getting a short introduction to how democracies can also work:
"The European Parliament has the right to approve and dismiss the European Commission. Since 1994, commissioners-designate have been required to appear before an EP hearing. Under the Lisbon Treaty, EU heads of state propose a candidate for Commission President, taking into account the results of European elections. The candidate is elected by the EP." "Parliament can ask the Court to take action against the Commission or Council if they have acted in a way that is contrary to the spirit of EU law."
European people elect the MEPs (=Member of the European Parliament). So, the Commission is indirectly elected. I do agree that the representatives of the European Commission needs to accept that
For some more information how this works and where else indirect election is used: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indirect_election Do you recognize both in the US and in the UK how indirect election works and is used in our world today? Another question is, should any of those be changed. If you want them changed, could you explain why?
No, ...no, ....no....!
We don't allow gibberish on this forum. I asked YOU to name ONE lie, which was so obvious, so overwhelming, that you would have a slam dunk defending it. Just one. Not two or three. An obvious lie. Glaring. Unassailable. Just one lie that would prove your point. I was ready. I had my steak knives out and waiting for your response, ...and yet you wrote this....
Quote:
No, it is NOT my job to hunt down and bring about posts of his lies when it is part of the man himself,
How very cowardly of you. You "wussed out." Part of the man? According to whom?
If you make outlandish statements, such as there being a 'million lies,' and cannot point to even one, what does that make you?
What stops you from finding Boris Johnson's posts yourself what he has written about the EU for years in e.g. The Daily Telegraph as a Brussel correspondent? Your values and idealogy, which affect your attitudes?
No, it is NOT my job to hunt down and bring about posts of his lies when it is part of the man himself, and of his values and ideologies which are common across the globe. That is not the way how intelligent behaviour works when you are able to question your own beliefs.
But to help you forward, here's a few posts how he has to change his writings and his attitudes now that he's in charge of Foreign Secretary:
Although, as in Finland's case, it doesn't mean he will not stop telling lies to his supporters in some other ways when talking to his supporters for personal gain (probably his Facebook posts) . That kind of behaviour will most likely be part of his character in the future as well.
The news I've read about doesn't mean that Nigel Farage will drop out on political career. He will be held responsible for his acts as a person in the press. I recall reading that there are some policians in the UK who have killed themselves later on in life because of the blunders made in their career.
Nigel Farage dropping the leadership of UKIP has the very potential of being parallel to G.W.Bush saying "Mission accomplished", which has lead to creation of Isis, far more dangerous than Al-Qaeda ever has been. The real work of the cause of Brexit hasn't really even begun yet. It will takes years to see the effects but in the US case, it has and will still cost billions of dollars to the US taxpayers. How the debt is handled, is another subject but related to the foreign policy as in England's case as well.
To answer your video post in thorough details would require for me to write a post of dozens of pages of how that man believes in the lies of many of the way too conservative British Press news publications throughout the years. But to get a few realities of this world of ours through: He has an extremely narrow view of the changed world, of what the EU is, what does it represent in the globalized world, and how it actually works. The person doesn't understand the reasons how and why the globalism, build by us WESTERN COUNTRIES OURSELVES, requires changes from the nationalistic values we WESTERN COUNTRIES OURSELVES have also build in the past centuries. His "peace sign" at the end is pathetic one. He doesn't understand who is "the enemy" in our changed world. By the expressions he uses in his speech, he believes in uber nationalism and nothing can change his values any more in his life.
BTW, I'm getting closer to 50 years already, and I've lived much of my life in an already globalised world with constructive values and constructive attitude in real life. I don't blame the world for changing as it has done so since the existense of the universe, including the human knowledge of it.
Getting a short introduction to how democracies can also work:
"The European Parliament has the right to approve and dismiss the European Commission. Since 1994, commissioners-designate have been required to appear before an EP hearing. Under the Lisbon Treaty, EU heads of state propose a candidate for Commission President, taking into account the results of European elections. The candidate is elected by the EP." "Parliament can ask the Court to take action against the Commission or Council if they have acted in a way that is contrary to the spirit of EU law."
European people elect the MEPs (=Member of the European Parliament). So, the Commission is indirectly elected. I do agree that the representatives of the European Commission needs to accept that
For some more information how this works and where else indirect election is used: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indirect_election Do you recognize both in the US and in the UK how indirect election works and is used in our world today? Another question is, should any of those be changed. If you want them changed, could you explain why?
No, ...no, ....no....!
We don't allow gibberish on this forum. I asked YOU to name ONE lie, which was so obvious, so overwhelming, that you would have a slam dunk defending it. Just one. Not two or three. An obvious lie. Glaring. Unassailable. Just one lie that would prove your point. I was ready. I had my steak knives out and waiting for your response, ...and yet you wrote this....
Quote:
No, it is NOT my job to hunt down and bring about posts of his lies when it is part of the man himself,
How very cowardly of you. You "wussed out." Part of the man? According to whom?
If you make outlandish statements, such as there being a 'million lies,' and cannot point to even one, what does that make you?
Mozart
I can say that people with your values and political views which are stuck like a forever jumping record, will not believe that a person has lied even if the PERSON HIM/HERSELF has said he/she lied.
Sorry, I see behind your attitudes. I will not fall to that category, which is extremely typical especially in US politics. Do remember that I've been following this board since the early 2000's (sometimes more, sometimes less).
YOU may want this one single lie but because the guy we are talking about has already admitted HIMSELF he has lied, and now his position require to take some actual responsibility of his own actions and words, your request doesn't matter.
I know that there might a third major party in the US (if the republican party will split). Finland has a multi-party system existing nearly 100 years which has an affect how politics is run in a democracy. To me, the 2 party system is not working well to be able to represent a proper democracy, where people have to try to listen what others are saying.
If you want this one single lie from Boris Johnson, go ask it from a US citizen or from British or UK citizen, who doesn't share the same attitude as you do - not me. Your kind of logic does not work in many parts of Europe simply because its too narrow and stupid, and doesn't result to anything constructive.
Or then stop harassing people who you are not capable of dealing with except with the too well known simplicity.
Your argument is invalid because here in the us it is a democratic republic, a fusion of various things into one. In our government (the republic aspect) it's understood that the majority may rule, but with respect to the (political) minority so that the majority cannot just impose their will and deny rights, etc.
There in the US it is anything but a democratic republic, where not only majority may rule respecting the voice of minority but quite contrarily - minority may rule ignoring the will of majority. Only in the US they can call it a democracy. Just remember George Bush who was elecred by minority, your very system is designed not to allow people to express their will freely and directly, at any moment their will can be ignored, in the very system you elect not a person but some other person who as I understend is not even legally obliged to vote as majority voted. Let alone that if majority cannot impose its will on a certain issue (we are not talking about violating of basic rights) - then it is not democracy. But don't be upset, you are not alone , actually there is no democracy anywhere, wgat countrues really differ in is scale of competition within elite (here the West is really good) and scale of violence required to keep people under control. Before in your prosperous countries it was not really required to boist security forces snd implenent tougher control, but those days are gone, and more with every single day we live.
So... things are looking lousy for the Russian Olympic Team...
Wrong. I'm not interested in any ruling body which is not democratic, and to you that equates to 'must want to do things the American way'? That's quite an impressive but groundless leap in logic you've made there.
What? The US president is NOT elected democratically, according to you, because it is INDIRECTLY elected? Please explain.
Quote:
The Common Foreign and Security policy (CFSP) is already 'true' and it's evolving under the European External Action Service - link below, but you can stick your head in the sand and pretend it isn't if it makes you feel better. Even if it doesn't evolve soon, do you think we should hang around just in case it isn't an expensive xxxx up like most other things the EU gets its claws into?
Yes. I've know this for years. What else? Examples how and where it has been used: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_operations_of_the_European_Union I'm supporting that NATO should be dismantled in some time frame, although at this time, because of Russian internal problems affecting Russia's foreign policies, it would affect the whole of Europe as well in order to defend itself from Russian aggressions.
READ also this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EU_Battlegroup "The Battlegroups reached full operational capacity on 1 January 2007, although, as of July 2015 they are yet to see any military action.[4]"
Do you understand anything of these what you read, if you read them at all?
Quote:
European integration has been the dream of European nationalists for hundreds of years, even the UK's own resident fascist, Sir Oswald Mosley, wanted a united Europe, but their dream has been turned into reality for the betterment of politicians, bureaucrats, bankers and multinationals, though a few crumbs have been thrown to the plebs. EU supporters have some odd ideas about what leavers want from Brexit. (And globalism is a reality; it really isn't in dispute. That's just a non sequitur you've slipped in.)
This ideology you are presenting is a fallacy. You don't live in Europe, right? Nowadays, even the original EEC (later EC) seemed to have been too much for many European nationalists although most of them was accepting it, before it became absorbed to the current EU. Yes, globalism is the reality, which we as westerners must become accustomed to because we have made the most inventions allowing it to become reality in this world. When the nationalists want to break up the EU, they have absolutely no plans at all how things should be constructed because "rebuilding" anything doesn't concern them. It somebody else's problem to find out how to rebuild a society once they have wrecked it - because those people can't rebuild even their own personal lives.
Quote:
The Prime Minister is in charge of Johnson's position, and you're free to distrust him, even though you can't vote for or against him, but what lies has Johnson told? Please don't refer back to your list of Euromyths from the EC unless you can be more specific. He certainly wasn't responsible for all those. He didn't even work for the majority of those sources! For every 'lie' you can produce I can produce more from EU supporters. You see, all politicians do lie. It's laughable that EU supporters whinge when their own lying tactics are used even mildly against them. (The remain camp even wheeled out one of our former prime ministers like he was some kind of wise elder statesman. He is anything but, having been a huge EU supporter and even wanted Russia to join, and the UK to join the euro. He tried to promote a moral vision for the UK while, it later transpired, that he'd been having an affair with one of his own colleagues!)
We have enough examples of how these people behave in the reality when given the power. It's not a matter of a nationality but a matter of values and human behaviour - human psychology involved. Please, get a hold on to a "A dummies guide to psychology". Read especially "A dummies guide to nationalistic behaviour and propaganda" as we have a couple of centuries' history to prove how those people behave in reality of us.
Quote:
I very much hope that Brexit means Brexit, and British people will deal with it, though our duplicitious political class might feel differently and try to avoid Brexiting for as long as they possibly can. If that happens, you can be sure this will rumble on and on. No one wants that, so I hope politicians accept Brexit as the reality. And the idea that we leavers want the WW2 (or Empire) era back, or that we expect Brexiting will put everything right are more of those odd ideas you EU supporters psychologically cling to.
I'll ask one more time, more in hope than in expectation, about what you think about 'Brexit, the movie'. I realise it and the link I posted above confront your prejudices, but if you're going to close your mind to any argument that's difficult to deal with we can't engage in any meaningful debate. There's no rush to reply. I'd rather you watched it carefully, then replied, rather than with the usual knee-jerk stuff I've come to expect from you. PLEASE.
I'll check this fully later and reply to that later on but the introduction itself was a matter of propaganda for the already indoctrinated people, whose values are stuck to the very history of Europe and its values, of which Europe is questioning itself now with the EU. Democracy itself also needs to find ways how to deal with globalism, where co-operation between nations and other global forces are a reality. Countries in the EU borders such as Russia and Turkey do give much more concern that Europe must live up to the democratic non-violent principles. Giving too much power to the nationalistic values will destroy European democracy as well, because nationalism is inherently violent in its nature. Political murders have also started to re-appear because of nationalism has risen again from the WW2 ashes.
Wrong. I'm not interested in any ruling body which is not democratic, and to you that equates to 'must want to do things the American way'? That's quite an impressive but groundless leap in logic you've made there.
What? The US president is NOT elected democratically, according to you, because it is INDIRECTLY elected? Please explain.
Quote:
The Common Foreign and Security policy (CFSP) is already 'true' and it's evolving under the European External Action Service - link below, but you can stick your head in the sand and pretend it isn't if it makes you feel better. Even if it doesn't evolve soon, do you think we should hang around just in case it isn't an expensive xxxx up like most other things the EU gets its claws into?
Yes. I've know this for years. What else? Examples how and where it has been used: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_operations_of_the_European_Union I'm supporting that NATO should be dismantled in some time frame, although at this time, because of Russian internal problems affecting Russia's foreign policies, it would affect the whole of Europe as well in order to defend itself from Russian aggressions.
READ also this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EU_Battlegroup "The Battlegroups reached full operational capacity on 1 January 2007, although, as of July 2015 they are yet to see any military action.[4]"
Do you understand anything of these what you read, if you read them at all?
Quote:
European integration has been the dream of European nationalists for hundreds of years, even the UK's own resident fascist, Sir Oswald Mosley, wanted a united Europe, but their dream has been turned into reality for the betterment of politicians, bureaucrats, bankers and multinationals, though a few crumbs have been thrown to the plebs. EU supporters have some odd ideas about what leavers want from Brexit. (And globalism is a reality; it really isn't in dispute. That's just a non sequitur you've slipped in.)
This ideology you are presenting is a fallacy. You don't live in Europe, right? Nowadays, even the original EEC (later EC) seemed to have been too much for many European nationalists although most of them was accepting it, before it became absorbed to the current EU. Yes, globalism is the reality, which we as westerners must become accustomed to because we have made the most inventions allowing it to become reality in this world. When the nationalists want to break up the EU, they have absolutely no plans at all how things should be constructed because "rebuilding" anything doesn't concern them. It somebody else's problem to find out how to rebuild a society once they have wrecked it - because those people can't rebuild even their own personal lives.
Quote:
The Prime Minister is in charge of Johnson's position, and you're free to distrust him, even though you can't vote for or against him, but what lies has Johnson told? Please don't refer back to your list of Euromyths from the EC unless you can be more specific. He certainly wasn't responsible for all those. He didn't even work for the majority of those sources! For every 'lie' you can produce I can produce more from EU supporters. You see, all politicians do lie. It's laughable that EU supporters whinge when their own lying tactics are used even mildly against them. (The remain camp even wheeled out one of our former prime ministers like he was some kind of wise elder statesman. He is anything but, having been a huge EU supporter and even wanted Russia to join, and the UK to join the euro. He tried to promote a moral vision for the UK while, it later transpired, that he'd been having an affair with one of his own colleagues!)
We have enough examples of how these people behave in the reality when given the power. It's not a matter of a nationality but a matter of values and human behaviour - human psychology involved. Please, get a hold on to a "A dummies guide to psychology". Read especially "A dummies guide to nationalistic behaviour and propaganda" as we have a couple of centuries' history to prove how those people behave in reality of us.
Quote:
I very much hope that Brexit means Brexit, and British people will deal with it, though our duplicitious political class might feel differently and try to avoid Brexiting for as long as they possibly can. If that happens, you can be sure this will rumble on and on. No one wants that, so I hope politicians accept Brexit as the reality. And the idea that we leavers want the WW2 (or Empire) era back, or that we expect Brexiting will put everything right are more of those odd ideas you EU supporters psychologically cling to.
I'll ask one more time, more in hope than in expectation, about what you think about 'Brexit, the movie'. I realise it and the link I posted above confront your prejudices, but if you're going to close your mind to any argument that's difficult to deal with we can't engage in any meaningful debate. There's no rush to reply. I'd rather you watched it carefully, then replied, rather than with the usual knee-jerk stuff I've come to expect from you. PLEASE.
I'll check this fully later and reply to that later on but the introduction itself was a matter of propaganda for the already indoctrinated people, whose values are stuck to the very history of Europe and its values, of which Europe is questioning itself now with the EU. Democracy itself also needs to find ways how to deal with globalism, where co-operation between nations and other global forces are a reality. Countries in the EU borders such as Russia and Turkey do give much more concern that Europe must live up to the democratic non-violent principles. Giving too much power to the nationalistic values will destroy European democracy as well, because nationalism is inherently violent in its nature. Political murders have also started to re-appear because of nationalism has risen again from the WW2 ashes.
What a silly answer. I certainly haven't said, inferred or even implied, any such thing regarding American politics. One thing you really do excel at making is impressive, groundless leaps. I've asked you before to try to concentrate on what I've said, not on what you would like me to have said.
So we're agreed then: The EU's Commmon Foreign and Security policy is evolving. Despite the slow pace of progress, the European External Action Service still has 5000 staff and an annual budget of over half a billion euro. I suppose you feel that's money well spent. Do you think the UK should wait around to see what a xxxx up it can make of society? It made a start letting Greece join the euro, ably assisted by Goldman Sachs of course. The odds for it improving society aren't good.
I live approximately half way between London and Brighton in South East England which is of course in both Europe and in the European Union. Check it out on a map for yourself if you're in doubt.
The original EEC was too much for me. The British establishment line was that the 'Common Market' as it was then known was a trade block that would involve no loss of sovereignty. No British government has ever corrected that lie. They have always ridiculed anyone who disagreed, but political and monetary union was always the end game. You knew that, I assume?
And globalism is a reality. I've told you that isn't in dispute. Are you saying the globalism controls national democracies; that national democracies can't react to globalism as they see fit? It's absurd to think the UK leaving the EU will 'wreck' society. This piece of land managed well enough for hundreds of years before we joined the EU and certainly can again. The UK will leave the EU and govern itself according to UK Parliamentary democracy. Why does that worry you so much? The EU will carry on without us if that's what European citizens want. Most of the world's countries are not in the EU ... are they full of nationalists to be feared and insulted? Your arguments are irrational, but my personal life is just fine as are the personal lives of all the Brexiters I know.
No thoughts on Johnson's lies then. Thought not. Predictably, you've just swallowed the remain campaign camp line without considering the opposing arguments properly. You stick with your 'Dummies' guide. It's made for europhiles. (I do already have a copy, by chance.)
I know you disagree with the Brexit the Movie contributors and me, but we haven't really got to the bottom of why you disagree. Trying to call into question the character of people who don't agree with you without reasonable foundation just won't do it, and to suggest even the introduction was a 'matter of propaganda' is to avoid the argument, nothing new there. It's difficult for you when remain campaigners give you no sensible arguments to work with, I know.
I want to believe you've really thought about the Brexit argument but don't want you to waste your time and mine droning on for dozens of pages I won't read when you've already told me ad nauseam what you think of my 'nationalistic values', etc, anyway.
Britain's decision to leave the EU has led to a "dramatic deterioration" in economic activity, not seen since the aftermath of the financial crisis.
Free Milagro Sala! What happened to Santiago Maldonado? What happened to ARA San Juan? Mapuche Lives Matter! Stop the political persecution in Argentina! Stop the looting of Argentina!
Britain's decision to leave the EU has led to a "dramatic deterioration" in economic activity, not seen since the aftermath of the financial crisis.
From the article:
"Let's be clear, the PMI data is a measure of sentiment, it's not a measure of any hard activity in the economy.
"What it tells us is businesses confidence has been dented, they're not sure, they're in a period of uncertainty now." Philip Hammond, Chancellor of the Exchequer.
He's right, but what's really causing the wobble is the government's lacklustre response to the referendum. It is under no legal obligation to abide by the result, and doesn't want to for all Theresa May's 'Brexit is Brexit' mantra, but politicians know that if they don't at least appear to be going through the motions, public patience will disappear fast.
There are also good hard indications that the BBC doesn't like to report.
Although, as in Finland's case, it doesn't mean he will not stop telling lies to his supporters in some other ways when talking to his supporters for personal gain (probably his Facebook posts) . That kind of behaviour will most likely be part of his character in the future as well.
The news I've read about doesn't mean that Nigel Farage will drop out on political career. He will be held responsible for his acts as a person in the press. I recall reading that there are some policians in the UK who have killed themselves later on in life because of the blunders made in their career.
Nigel Farage dropping the leadership of UKIP has the very potential of being parallel to G.W.Bush saying "Mission accomplished", which has lead to creation of Isis, far more dangerous than Al-Qaeda ever has been. The real work of the cause of Brexit hasn't really even begun yet. It will takes years to see the effects but in the US case, it has and will still cost billions of dollars to the US taxpayers. How the debt is handled, is another subject but related to the foreign policy as in England's case as well.
To answer your video post in thorough details would require for me to write a post of dozens of pages of how that man believes in the lies of many of the way too conservative British Press news publications throughout the years. But to get a few realities of this world of ours through: He has an extremely narrow view of the changed world, of what the EU is, what does it represent in the globalized world, and how it actually works. The person doesn't understand the reasons how and why the globalism, build by us WESTERN COUNTRIES OURSELVES, requires changes from the nationalistic values we WESTERN COUNTRIES OURSELVES have also build in the past centuries. His "peace sign" at the end is pathetic one. He doesn't understand who is "the enemy" in our changed world. By the expressions he uses in his speech, he believes in uber nationalism and nothing can change his values any more in his life.
BTW, I'm getting closer to 50 years already, and I've lived much of my life in an already globalised world with constructive values and constructive attitude in real life. I don't blame the world for changing as it has done so since the existense of the universe, including the human knowledge of it.
Getting a short introduction to how democracies can also work:
"The European Parliament has the right to approve and dismiss the European Commission. Since 1994, commissioners-designate have been required to appear before an EP hearing. Under the Lisbon Treaty, EU heads of state propose a candidate for Commission President, taking into account the results of European elections. The candidate is elected by the EP." "Parliament can ask the Court to take action against the Commission or Council if they have acted in a way that is contrary to the spirit of EU law."
European people elect the MEPs (=Member of the European Parliament). So, the Commission is indirectly elected. I do agree that the representatives of the European Commission needs to accept that
For some more information how this works and where else indirect election is used: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indirect_election Do you recognize both in the US and in the UK how indirect election works and is used in our world today? Another question is, should any of those be changed. If you want them changed, could you explain why?
No, ...no, ....no....!
We don't allow gibberish on this forum. I asked YOU to name ONE lie, which was so obvious, so overwhelming, that you would have a slam dunk defending it. Just one. Not two or three. An obvious lie. Glaring. Unassailable. Just one lie that would prove your point. I was ready. I had my steak knives out and waiting for your response, ...and yet you wrote this....
Quote:
No, it is NOT my job to hunt down and bring about posts of his lies when it is part of the man himself,
How very cowardly of you. You "wussed out." Part of the man? According to whom?
If you make outlandish statements, such as there being a 'million lies,' and cannot point to even one, what does that make you?
Mozart
I can say that people with your values and political views which are stuck like a forever jumping record, will not believe that a person has lied even if the PERSON HIM/HERSELF has said he/she lied.
Sorry, I see behind your attitudes. I will not fall to that category, which is extremely typical especially in US politics. Do remember that I've been following this board since the early 2000's (sometimes more, sometimes less).
YOU may want this one single lie but because the guy we are talking about has already admitted HIMSELF he has lied, and now his position require to take some actual responsibility of his own actions and words, your request doesn't matter.
I know that there might a third major party in the US (if the republican party will split). Finland has a multi-party system existing nearly 100 years which has an affect how politics is run in a democracy. To me, the 2 party system is not working well to be able to represent a proper democracy, where people have to try to listen what others are saying.
If you want this one single lie from Boris Johnson, go ask it from a US citizen or from British or UK citizen, who doesn't share the same attitude as you do - not me. Your kind of logic does not work in many parts of Europe simply because its too narrow and stupid, and doesn't result to anything constructive.
Or then stop harassing people who you are not capable of dealing with except with the too well known simplicity.
:oyvey
One lie...! I just want one lie, OK?
Quote:
YOU may want this one single lie but because the guy we are talking about has already admitted HIMSELF he has lied,
When did he admit this lie, and what EXACTLY was the lie? (among the millions and millions of lies that he had already committed)
You're the only one who seems to know the answer here. Help us out!
Yes. Please try to read the real history of Europe, how nationalism was born in this continent, not just some US born propaganda publications, born out of how the US itself was born as a side effect of European history. (If I remember correctly, you had some single history book which you like(d) to refer to...), most likely written by the North Americans.
Thousands of local cultures existing before the modern concept of nationalism was born, were destroyed by killing and forcing people in many different ways such as harassing to accept the "new way of identifying nationality" and language(s) which were accepted by the nationalists who were to blame that we have such a number of countries, states, territories and such existing today. None of those borders have been naturally born - they have been drawn by someones who were in the position to be able to define such borders.
Even though the US has only a de facto English language, it doesn't really understand how the language itself is just a one form of defining what a culture is and what all it can entail.
2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous)