The Brexit. Has Cameroon Fooled us.

[L00b]

Just a correction, practically none of the attackers were refugees, they were disgruntled and estranged second and third generation immigrants in majority from Belgium. There are questions about the background of one of them who left a forged Syrian passport.

It's a moot correction, Tim: I did not suggest that the Paris attackers were Syrian or Afghan or Iraqi jihadis, but it is documented fact that most of the attackers came back from their training grounds in the Middle East to Belgium and France last summer with the throng of migrants.

It is the same in the Netherlands, perhaps I stated it too strongly. However, there is an increasing unease with Europhiles (yes, I am one, yes, most of my friends in the Netherlands are) about the way in which Britain is trying to force yet another change to Europe by bullying.

You see it as bullying, I just see it as being opportunistic to protect and further its national interest.

 

All UKIP rethoric and little Englanders (and their muted political influence about the issue) firmly put aside, it's no secret that Berlin and Paris have long had the knives out for the City. But, rightly or wrongly, the City is this country's budget and economic lung, so I for one ain't going to blame Cameron looking after it.

Brexit won't change the Eurozone, in fact, it won't change Britain, I am fairly sure you know that. What is happening though is that the last influence Britain had (remember Gordon Brown tackling the crisis by utilising Europe?) is being squandered on petty arguments in the shape of non-existing negotiations for non-consequential changes.

I wouldn't call getting the UK (and by association all other non-€ EU member states) out of the federalisation race a 'non-consequential change'. Cameron is getting a formal two-speed EU, that's a result in anyone's book, particularly considering the timescales involved.

 

As regards squandering influence, I wouldn't worry too much: money still talks the loudest influence, and the UK has more net cash to give on paper to the EU than Germany. But if we had to take any influence as having been squandered, then it's the voting public who's put a full contingent of UKIP MEPs in Strasbourg who's squandered it in the first place. Last I checked, MEPs still make European law, not No.10 Downing Street.

 

But since we are talking about Germany, being really 'the EU' these days, why not look at how they've been doing on democratic accountability, freedom of speech, etc. recently:

National public service broadcaster Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen (ZDF), which was recently forced into a humiliating apology for their silence on migrant violence and sex assault, is being drawn into a fresh scandal after one of their former bureau chiefs admitted the company takes orders from the government on what it reports. He said journalists received instructions to write news that would be “to Ms. Merkel’s liking”.

 

Former head of ZDF Bonn Dr. Wolfgang Herles make the remarks during a radio event (from minute 27) in Berlin where journalists discussed the media landscape. Moving on to the freedom of the press, the panel chair asked Dr. Herles whether things in Germany had got “seriously out of whack”. With an honesty perhaps unusual in Germany, Dr. Herles replied that ordinary Germans were totally losing faith in the media, something he called a “scandal”. <...>

 

Worse than the mainstream, government controlled and poll-tax funded media in Germany just agreeing with the ruling coalition, the stations actually took orders on what was and was not to be reported on. He said:

 

“…the topics about which are reported are laid down by the government.

 

“There are many topics that would be more important than what the government wants. But they, of course, want to deflect attention away from what doesn’t happen. Yet what doesn’t happen is often more important than what does happen – more important than gesture politics”.

(excuse the Breitbart source, soon to be followed by more reputable news outlet I'm sure, since this is merely interview-transcribing).

 

Could it be that Berlin has been directing its EU handlers and bureaucrats in the same way that it's been directing its massmedia?

 

Surely not?!?

Edited February 4, 2016 by L00b

[Zamo]

Latest YouGov poll has the 'out' vote 9 points clear. First poll since Cameron announced his negotiation 'victories'.

 

The problem is he never even tried to get the thing people want e.g. control of our own borders and able to set our own non-trade related laws. For now it appears the OP question has been answered... Cameron has not fooled anyone. Although he is perhaps still deluding himself.

[Michael_W]

Latest YouGov poll has the 'out' vote 9 points clear. First poll since Cameron announced his negotiation 'victories'.

 

The problem is he never even tried to get the thing people want e.g. control of our own borders and able to set our own non-trade related laws. For now it appears the OP question has been answered... Cameron has not fooled anyone. Although he is perhaps still deluding himself.

 

Spot on as usual fella, the problem most of us have with the EU, apart from the 'obvious' things you have mentioned, is why don't we hear much about all the 'great' things being in the EU does for us ? My guess is, that apart from those with 'self serving' interest amongst us who see some benefit, the vast majority of us see no benefit at all, and on that basis ..... I reckon I will be voting out !

[Orzel]

so why did they fall over themselves to join the EU? They most definitly knew that what they were letting themselves in for by joining.

 

No they did not knew.

Many things led to that. Most people thought it will boost their economy via free trade and open borders.

You know - single market and such. Most were not aware that they are giving EU that much power. And at that time whole bureaucracy was a lot smaller but been growing exponentially since.

 

You are mistaken, Eastern Europe has radical elements, as does most of any nation/region in the world, but it is not inherently xenophobic.

Yes they are. Not aggressive most of them but xenophobic definitely. So it doesn't show but comes up in private conversations.

 

The population is highly cynical of government though, understandable after decades of being suppressed by the Soviets.

They had no experience with democracy so scum surfaced first.

Most of eastern Europe doesn't have established political class.

It slowly emerges but its painful process.

 

... when you speak to Eastern Europeans you will find most of them are in favour of the EU.

Free trade and free movement. Money. Not imposing German occupation via non accountable non elected politicians. Like Mr Tusk mentioned earlier.

 

So EURO NCAP would stop applying to cars made in the UK would it?

Bad example. That is UK's DfT child. And voluntary. But we get your point. So ..

 

... if the UK leaves the EU it will still be subject to these laws if it wants to trade with the EU (which is by far its biggest trade partner).

Same applies to Pakistan, India, Kuwait, USA, UAE and any other trade partner.

But they have no power to impose those rules on UK. Only on UK trade with them directly. That is part of being severing nation.

[max]

Spot on as usual fella, the problem most of us have with the EU, apart from the 'obvious' things you have mentioned, is why don't we hear much about all the 'great' things being in the EU does for us ? My guess is, that apart from those with 'self serving' interest amongst us who see some benefit, the vast majority of us see no benefit at all, and on that basis ..... I reckon I will be voting out !

 

How about:

 

An EU explainer

or:

Being part of the EU

 

Have a look at those, there's quite a few in there that might persuade me to vote to stay in, not least the parity of excise duty on wine.

[truman]

How about:

 

An EU explainer

or:

Being part of the EU

 

Have a look at those, there's quite a few in there that might persuade me to vote to stay in, not least the parity of excise duty on wine.

 

Ben Acheson can hardly be said to have no vested interest in the EU

 

"Policy Adviser at the European Parliament in Brussels"

[max]

Ben Acheson can hardly be said to have no vested interest in the EU

 

"Policy Adviser at the European Parliament in Brussels"

 

It matters little whether or not someone has a vested interest or not. Are his statements correct, spin or lies? There is truth to be found on both sides of the arguments, I was merely presenting positive things about membership.

[Eckythyump]

nothing wrong with my head, i've got certificates saying its ok.

 

Your heads been certified?

[andyofborg]

Your heads been certified?

 

yup

 

..................................................................

[Harrystottle]

Cameron's deal so far. "I will give the British people an in out referendum on EU membership". We will get the chance to vote to escape in this parliament. What exactly do you want Cameron to do now? Do you want him to get a slightly better offer from the EU so we vote to stay in?

 

No, I'm for leaving. I actually say that with some regret, because the EU could have been a great thing; I voted to remain in the 70's. But it hasn't turned out like that.

 

Merkel's handling of the immigration crisis has convinced me that we have to leave.

 

It doesn't matter what Cameron does, tbh. Anything he gets can be changed back later, as Martin Schulz has pointed out. Plus some of the things he is making a big deal about (in work benefits for immigrants) count for very little in the scheme of things.