moonraker

I don't dismiss any of your concerns and I do not unquestionably back the EU but I do believe it is the best option for our future.

Tough nothing to do with EU that dastardly European Court of Human rights has rejected the appeal by th family of Jean Charles De Menzies. What were they thinking backing the U K government!

The Greatest Britain of all Time was also in favour, mind you he did die over 50 years ago. Winston Churchill, a former army officer, war reporter and British Prime Minister (1940-45 and 1951-55), was one of the first to call for the creation of a ‘United States of Europe’. Following the Second World War, he was convinced that only a united Europe could guarantee peace. His aim was to eliminate the European ills of nationalism and war-mongering once and for all.

Quoting some one who dies nearly 40 years ago, very relevent.

So not the same as nationalising then. Not to allow government subsidies makes sense not only within the EU but outside. The history of subsidised industries is pretty poor, most eventually fail as they become reliant on the subsidies and neglect running the business efficiently and effectively. If you want the most extreme examples of subsidised industries and failure look no further than the old USSR. The WTO also prohibits government subsidies where the subsidies are contingent, whether solely or as one of several other conditions, upon the use of domestic over imported goods. So even without the EU the government could not subsidise the steel industry to counter cheap imports.

You have missed my point I did not claim we caused them although in the case of Ireland and all the troubles we can hardly blame anyone outside these Islands. You claimed we worked perfectly fine before 1975, my examples were just to illustrate that ‘perfectly’ might be a slight distortion of reality. Conversely are you intimating that all of our recent and /or current troubles such as they are can be laid at the feet of the EU: Blair/Bush alliance, North Korean threats, Islamist terrorism, world financial failure? I would argue that if a strong organsiation like the EU had existed after WWI, WWII would almost certainly have been avoided.

Did we? 2 World Wars and one lost Empire!, 1920,s were pretty tuff, as was the period post the napolonic wars, the plague tears wernt to hot and as for the civil war, the endless scottish issues and Ireland, need I go on.

The timing of political statements is everything, Merkel is the consummate politician and the timing and context of this statement is crucial. With the rise of nationalist parties across Europe this vision is certainly becoming more blurred and I doubt she would say or indeed endorse the same thing today.

The timing of political statements is everything, Merkel is the consummate politician and the timing and context of this statement is crucial. With the rise of nationalist parties across Europe this vision is certainly becoming more blurred and I doubt she would say or indeed endorse the same thing today.

Deleted!

I’m not arguing, that the difficulty of leaving is the defining factor for staying. My point is Brexit have failed to address any direct questions about, short medium or long term outcomes. While they somewhat disingenuously brand the stay campaign as project fear, the Brexit campaign twin approach is ‘it will be better out, just trust us’ and ‘we can do better on our own than without a load of meddling eurocrats’ there is no real context and little imperial evidence to justify either claim. The additional short term (5 0- 10 years) pain is just another issue Brexit are burying their heads in the sand over.

The Gus O'Donnell intervention has posed some very difficult questions for Brexit. On the Today programme it was suggested by a contributor that the EU would be in no hurry to conclude exit negotiations especially when Germany and France have elections next year, and the EU itself wont want to be seen to be easy to leave, maybe unfair but realistic. Until we are completely uncoupled from the EU, 5 – 10 years seems fair we will be subject to extant, amended and new rules and regulations with no say in their framing. Any savings as a result of freedom from ‘EU Red Tape’ can not be realised for minimum of 5 years and indeed in terms of manufacturing trade we will have to comply in full with EU regs. I personally doubt their will be any worthwhile net gain on the UK PLC bottom line purely as result of leaving the EU. I sort of get those who are ideologically opposed to the EU, I also understand those whose frustrations leads them to question the EU. What I struggle with is the inability of those who want to leave but time and time again fail to address the genuine concerns of leaving, raised by raft of informed and knowledgeable people and organisations. The stock answers, in no particular order are: • Its scaremongering • Its government propaganda • They are on the gravy train • That’s not what, some bloke from somewhere possibly important says! • I/we don’t agree • Depending on the specific issue, we can be like ‘Norway, Switzerland, Canada’ (note never like all of them at the same time!) • Wait till Turkey joins • Were all doomed! None of which provides answers to the key questions: ‘How will the UK mitigate the risks of leaving the EU in respect of this forecast in the short medium and long term’ ‘Why is the forecast wrong’ ‘What would you we do instead of what we do now’ and ‘How will things be different outside the EU’.

You are right it was not my point, neither did you get it, I was responding to a link to Brexit supporting analysis report from a little known South African company, and questioning its overall relevance in the face of a far greater number such reports from more respected or at least recognised company's that conclude the exact opposite.

Is that net of gross?

I am looking forward to it, will it be taxed?

So now you want us to accept the conclusions of an obscure South African financial wealth management company who specialise in African markets over much more established and respected ones. Well done the express researchers.

Thank god for that, and there was I under the impression that nothing is certain post the referendum, apart of course, if we leave, we will get brilliant trade deals, immigration will cesae, we will be more secure than Fort Knox. It is so reassuring that their individuals like you who can predict the future, are you related to Doris Stokes per chance.

I could not agree more, the Muslim community needs to do more.

There are a number of definitions for mass I explained how it used when refereeing to populations. Please can you tell me your definition in the context of your claim?

Oh dear another made up statement presented as fact. Under the United Nations Charter Racism or "racial discrimination" shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction, or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin that has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life. And whilst the term Religion is not used case law has established that discrimination on religious grounds falls under this charter.

Wow, I do not recognise the term in any practical sense. You have invented, opp’s borrowed, an emotive meaningless term which has sadly become some sort of reality in your pea sized brain. I do not know how you define mass, normally when one refers to the mass of a given population they are refereeing to the majority. So lets test your assertion of Mass Immigration. Firstly the current number of UK citizens who adhere to the Islamic Religion is 4.7% of they population, so not the mass, secondly 47% of those were born here so not immigrants, of the other 53% approximately 30% are recent immigrant (post 1990 for the purposes of this analysis), or 18% of the total in real numbers that’s a little under 500,000 or an average of 25000 a year, hey they would all fit into St Marys with room to spare for the bigots to act as the away fans. So when compared to the total population of the UK the totality of Islamic Immigration does not support your claim. Now it gets interesting as you set the benchmark of Islamic Immigration we have to use the Global Islamic Population to get an understanding of how many individuals, could by the normal interpretation of population mass, be considered the Immigrant Islamic Mass to the UK there are circa 2.2 million Muslims in the world. Using the figures above it works out that 0.0067% of all Muslims have emigrated to the UK in the past 60 years or so and UK Muslims make up 0.12% of the Global Muslim adherents, so while you like the emotion your meaningless term might generate it is neither factually or literally within a thousand light years of the truth.

Another great irony, you rebut being called racist and then deduce that anyone who disagrees with your ridiculous position is happy to have their communities over run by Islam. You really are thick or the biggest WUM ever.

Well if the only rapists and terrorist were Muslims you might be on to something. More Europeans have been killed by non Muslim Terrorists. As to the rape charge a certain non-Muslim Australian immigrant, a well loved (by some) celebrity, children’s homes staff and countless other non Muslim perpetrators would suggest that religion is not a key factor, the one thing the vast majority have in common is they are all men. I might deduce that you are a closet extreme feminist plotting the downfall of the male gender. But then I wake up and realise that you just an intolerant racist, incapable of processing information and evidence to arrive at a rational understanding of anything remotely complex. One day it will be very lonely in your cave.

It cant possibly Sour Mash as Islam is not a race.

Within the political context of the time most people supported the NSDAP because their lives were blighted by Versailles and they wanted something to believe in. However a not insignificant number of Germans actively opposed the regime throughout its tenure, in fact over 77,000 German citizens were executed following a trial due to their resistance. Additionally it has been estimated that tens of thousands of suspected opponents of the regime (not Jews) were sent to Concentration Camps without trial and subsequently died. It should not be forgotten that throughout the rise to power of the NSDAP Western Governments continually appeased them. Whilst there are many factors that created the conditions to allow such an extreme and inhumane administration to lead a major European Country, lack of effective international law, treaties, unions and agreements was a major factor, far more significant than the acquiescence of the beleaguered German people.