• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

Danishfurniturelover said:
You are actually to undesirable for me to engage with.

You called failed immigrants undesirable. I wont talk with racists.

Appalling that, not even trying to point score. Just hoped as a society we had moved on from that sort of language.
Click to expand...

I’m an immigrant you idiot, many of my good friends have had to return to the UK and other countries, due to Australia’s immigration system, my fiancée is going to through (6 months and counting) the Immigration process now. On Tuesday night we are attending a zoom meeting on the subject of helping raise the issue of the system being unfair of couples being torn apart. Evidence below. Maybe you should tune in you might learn something. Calling someone you’ve never met a racist and failing to list one example of why you can’t cope with EU membership other than the plight of African farmers is laughable. Why don’t you go read your copy of the Sun or Daily Mail and rub your hands together at the prospect of Britain being Great again once your passport returns to Black instead of burgundy.

for the record my pointing out that Australia’s immigration process is designed to stop certain people from entering was commentary rather than personal belief. I didn’t vote for a stronger immigration process the same way that you voted for a better Britain without such high levels of immigration. Hypocritical cretin.

details of the zoom meeting below.

Topic
Labor Partner Visa Online Forum
Description
Please join Senator Kristina Keneally, Andrew Giles MP and Julian Hill MP to discuss the ongoing failure of the Morrison Government to process partner visas in a reasonable time.

We would like to discuss our ideas with you about how we can keep the pressure on Scott Morrison to make more common sense changes to speed up partner visa processing.

Please register below, and include any questions that you would like to ask of us.
Time
Dec 15, 2020 06:30 PM in 957 5469 3083
 
awesome dawson said:
I’m an immigrant you idiot, many of my good friends have had to return to the UK and other countries, due to Australia’s immigration system, my fiancée is going to through (6 months and counting) the Immigration process now. On Tuesday night we are attending a zoom meeting on the subject of helping raise the issue of the system being unfair of couples being torn apart. Evidence below. Maybe you should tune in you might learn something. Calling someone you’ve never met a racist and failing to list one example of why you can’t cope with EU membership other than the plight of African farmers is laughable. Why don’t you go read your copy of the Sun or Daily Mail and rub your hands together at the prospect of Britain being Great again once your passport returns to Black instead of burgundy.

for the record my pointing out that Australia’s immigration process is designed to stop certain people from entering was commentary rather than personal belief. I didn’t vote for a stronger immigration process the same way that you voted for a better Britain without such high levels of immigration. Hypocritical cretin.

details of the zoom meeting below.

Topic
Labor Partner Visa Online Forum
Description
Please join Senator Kristina Keneally, Andrew Giles MP and Julian Hill MP to discuss the ongoing failure of the Morrison Government to process partner visas in a reasonable time.

We would like to discuss our ideas with you about how we can keep the pressure on Scott Morrison to make more common sense changes to speed up partner visa processing.

Please register below, and include any questions that you would like to ask of us.
Time
Dec 15, 2020 06:30 PM in 957 5469 3083
Click to expand...

I have told you what you said was racist. If I or any leaver had used that language about immigrants who dont get into the uk we would be in a police cell.

I have time and time again as have others said why we wanted to leave the EU from law and order to a more outwardly looking country that engages with the wider world rather the a protectionist block. To being concerned with how the EU is moving forwards. To being concerned with not being able to remove the leaders of the EU but being able to vote out governments. To wanting nationalised services like trains and water.

Your acting like a bully like so many of the remoaners who could not accept people thinking a different way to them. So you try to belittle or bully them,see telling me to go read the sun or mail (I have never read either paper). Yet you still can not understand why so many millions vote the way they do.

Keep trying to push fella but you are without doubt the most deplorable person I have ever had the misfortune to engage with. As I have said and this is really the last time I will respond. I dont talk to racists. I find them "undesirable"
 
Danishfurniturelover said:
I have told you what you said was racist. If I or any leaver had used that language about immigrants who dont get into the uk we would be in a police cell.

I have time and time again as have others said why we wanted to leave the EU from law and order to a more outwardly looking country that engages with the wider world rather the a protectionist block. To being concerned with how the EU is moving forwards. To being concerned with not being able to remove the leaders of the EU but being able to vote out governments. To wanting nationalised services like trains and water.

Your acting like a bully like so many of the remoaners who could not accept people thinking a different way to them. So you try to belittle or bully them,see telling me to go read the sun or mail (I have never read either paper). Yet you still can not understand why so many millions vote the way they do.

Keep trying to push fella but you are without doubt the most deplorable person I have ever had the misfortune to engage with. As I have said and this is really the last time I will respond. I dont talk to racists. I find them "undesirable"
Click to expand...

still waiting for an actual example of the EU has affected your day to day life...

“law and order” hahaha you really are a trumpite aren’t you.
 
awesome dawson said:
still waiting for an actual example of the EU has affected your day to day life...

“law and order” hahaha you really are a trumpite aren’t you.
Click to expand...


I started the Trump thread.

Your a troll, I offered to meet you at a game and talk you through why leavers are not racist and the first thing your mind goes to is violence. So a thug and a racist.

Your on ignore.
 
nayenezgani said:
Telling someone they've been duped isn't the same as calling them stupid. If that's how an individual takes it, that's on them.

He's never laid blame on people for backing the Brexit con, they were manipulated by totally false data and claims of oven ready deals. How is that not being duped?
Click to expand...

So if they haven't been duped then they've been convinced by some very clever people and I know he doesn't believe that. I think it's his insistence that everyone who voted out has been duped is what I find tiresome - to me anyway it comes across as intellectual snobbery.

On the flipside you could say some people who voted remain were duped into it with false data and talk of an emergency budget, government funded mail remain leaflets through their door etc.

As ever there's a mixture of people and opinions in there, some people were of course duped as they have been in near enough every election since the beginning of time and some people made a decision of their own backs, friends and family opinions etc.

But some of his discussions on covid and other topics have been bang on, I'll try and listen to him a bit more as I always like to get a wide range of viewpoints
 
Last edited:
good listen on the FT Politics (Payne's Politics) podcast.

So basically, UK wants access to EU single market. EU said sure, we need to have regulatory alignment, UK said no. And i get that, as someone who's a REMOANER (shakes head) I can actually understand why the UK would say no to that, and the EU ask is too much.

Now falls to secondary element, where EU have said fine, then if you do diverge, we'll add tariffs as and when that happens to continue your access to our market. To me, that's a sensible solution all round, although am sure sensibility is in short supply when it comes to this topic and especially from Boris and co.
 
Diamond Lights said:
good listen on the FT Politics (Payne's Politics) podcast.

So basically, UK wants access to EU single market. EU said sure, we need to have regulatory alignment, UK said no. And i get that, as someone who's a REMOANER (shakes head) I can actually understand why the UK would say no to that, and the EU ask is too much.

Now falls to secondary element, where EU have said fine, then if you do diverge, we'll add tariffs as and when that happens to continue your access to our market. To me, that's a sensible solution all round, although am sure sensibility is in short supply when it comes to this topic and especially from Boris and co.
Click to expand...

I agree, it seems a reasonable solution. And - as far as I am aware - it's not as if the EU changes its regulations overnight, there is usually quite an extended period of discussion and negotiation within the EU, plus added time for each member country to ratify/implement. When that happens, it's possible it's a non-issue and the change is something we'd be Ok with replicating anyway. If not, we'd have time to prepare and try to negotiate an alternative. Worse case we face tariffs at some point much further down the line, rather than facing them now if we do end up with No Deal.
However from a public perception perspective it's as much about the semantics and presentation as it is about the detail. Agree to call it another kind of 'transition' (but find a better term) before we have to implement any new rule or standard and it might be enough for Boris to present as a victory.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
I agree, it seems a reasonable solution. And - as far as I am aware - it's not as if the EU changes its regulations overnight, there is usually quite an extended period of discussion and negotiation within the EU, plus added time for each member country to ratify/implement. When that happens, it's possible it's a non-issue and the change is something we'd be Ok with replicating anyway. If not, we'd have time to prepare and try to negotiate an alternative. Worse case we face tariffs at some point much further down the line, rather than facing them now if we do end up with No Deal.
However from a public perception perspective it's as much about the semantics and presentation as it is about the detail. Agree to call it another kind of 'transition' (but find a better term) before we have to implement any new rule or standard and it might be enough for Boris to present as a victory.
Click to expand...


forgot to mention, conversely, what if OUR regulations are stronger than EU, it's a mechanism that works both ways. But of course, in reality everyone knows why the EU are insisting on this and not the UK side. As if that will ever happen.
 
Diamond Lights said:
good listen on the FT Politics (Payne's Politics) podcast.

So basically, UK wants access to EU single market. EU said sure, we need to have regulatory alignment, UK said no. And i get that, as someone who's a REMOANER (shakes head) I can actually understand why the UK would say no to that, and the EU ask is too much.

Now falls to secondary element, where EU have said fine, then if you do diverge, we'll add tariffs as and when that happens to continue your access to our market. To me, that's a sensible solution all round, although am sure sensibility is in short supply when it comes to this topic and especially from Boris and co.
Click to expand...
That's not how they've created trade agreements with those they don't want to punish and it's not how trade agreements generally work either.

At best, the EU should be talking about standards for products imported into the EU - they shouldn't have any say on what we export to RoW. But that's not in the EU's DNA - they appear to have a need to control outside their borders in a use of protectionism that (Trump aside) has long been left behind by the developed world.
 
Diamond Lights said:
good listen on the FT Politics (Payne's Politics) podcast.

So basically, UK wants access to EU single market. EU said sure, we need to have regulatory alignment, UK said no. And i get that, as someone who's a REMOANER (shakes head) I can actually understand why the UK would say no to that, and the EU ask is too much.

Now falls to secondary element, where EU have said fine, then if you do diverge, we'll add tariffs as and when that happens to continue your access to our market. To me, that's a sensible solution all round, although am sure sensibility is in short supply when it comes to this topic and especially from Boris and co.
Click to expand...

Might surprise you but I also agree in principle, think it just depends whether the tariffs would be proportional and fair.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back