The EU Referendum - Thursday 23 June (with voting poll)

First topic message reminder :

Hopefully it will stop the arguments about Gib and we can tell Spain to pee off

Jesus, this Mikey can is as big a delusional 'fingers in ears nah nah nah' nut as Duty.

I hope we LEAVE, just so Dowlais can work out the EU has F*CK ALL to do with his business rates and he goes bust in a pit of self induced despair.

Alex_Germany wrote:

Nore Staat wrote: They are threatening to cut pensions of the old if I vote out.  They are threatening to slash public spending if I vote out.  Barrack Obama threatens a trade war between the US and Britain if I vote out.  The EC and other EU countries are threatening a trade war if I vote out.  They are threatening to allow free passport to terrorists onto our shores if I vote out.  They are threatening the possibility of real acts of war if I vote out.

That's not really accurate is it. The Economists and money markets are pointing out that Britain will be poorer following a Brexit, which means that, to maintain the Government's finances, spending needs to be cut, or taxes raised. It really ought to be up to the Brexiters to explain how they'd make up the £30 billion shortfall.

Obama isn't threatening a trade war. Just saying Britian shouldn't expect any favours if it leaves the EU - especially as it will lose a lot of relevance on the world stage.

Other EU countries are saying pretty much the same think.

Who is allowing free passports to terrorists - is this another scare story?

Who is threatening war? Europe will be a less stable place with the UK out - which is why Russia favours out (and favoured a Scottish leave vote).

At the end of the day, the Scots saw economic sense and voted to remain part of the UK and the EU. Hopefully the UK as a whole will also see economic sense.

Obama has said, as far as US trade is concerned, Britain will go to the 'back of the queue'. Whether you see that as threatening a trade war depends on how you define 'trade war'. It is a threat.

Other EU countries are bound to say the same thing. Their EU reps are terrified of a knock-on effect should Brexit win the day. Will those EU countries, which already benefit from trade with the UK, block trade with the UK? Cutting their nose to spit their face, methinks. I honestly doubt they will and, even if some do, there are plenty of other opportunities worldwide.

So we are to trust what Russia says now? What if Russia supported Remain? Would you vote Brexit? The possibility of war breaking out in Europe has been used as a threat. It's nonsense, as is the claim that Brexit will weaken the quality of intelligence between the UK and European nations.

Coxy001 wrote:I just want to know whatever a democratic trade war is, or whatever it is he's warbling on about.

WAR. WARRRRRRRRRR. WAR FROCH!!!!! C'MON!!!! 80,000 PEOPLE IN THE TRENCHES. WAR GRRRRRRRR!!!!!

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Coxy001 wrote:I just want to know whatever a democratic trade war is, or whatever it is he's warbling on about.

WAR. WARRRRRRRRRR. WAR FROCH!!!!! C'MON!!!! 80,000 PEOPLE IN THE TRENCHES. WAR GRRRRRRRR!!!!!

Aaaahahahahahahhaha

Just seen this on Twitter. I have no time to check but I wonder if it is indeed true??

Cadbury moved factory to Poland 2011 with EU grant.
Ford Transit moved to Turkey 2013 with EU grant.
Jaguar Land Rover has recently agreed to build a new plant in Slovakia with EU grant, owned by Tata, the same company who have trashed our steel works and emptied the workers pension funds.
Peugeot closed its Ryton (was Rootes Group) plant and moved production to Slovakia with EU grant.
British Army's new Ajax fighting vehicles to be built in SPAIN using SWEDISH steel at the request of the EU to support jobs in Spain with EU grant, rather than Wales.
Dyson gone to Malaysia, with an EU loan.
Crown Closures, Bournemouth (Was METAL BOX), gone to Poland with EU grant, once employed 1,200.
M&S manufacturing gone to far east with EU loan.
Hornby models gone. In fact all toys and models now gone from UK along with the patents all with with EU grants.
Gillette gone to eastern Europe with EU grant.
Texas Instruments Greenock gone to Germany with EU grant.
Indesit at Bodelwyddan Wales gone with EU grant.
Sekisui Alveo said production at its Merthyr Tydfil Industrial Park foam plant will relocate production to Roermond in the Netherlands, with EU funding.
Hoover Merthyr factory moved out of UK to Czech Republic and the Far East by Italian company Candy with EU backing.
ICI integration into Holland’s AkzoNobel with EU bank loan and within days of the merger, several factories in the UK, were closed, eliminating 3,500 jobs Boots sold to Italians Stefano Pessina who have based their HQ in Switzerland to avoid tax to the tune of £80 million a year, using an EU loan for the purchase.
JDS Uniphase run by two Dutch men, bought up companies in the UK with £20 million in EU 'regeneration' grants, created a pollution nightmare and just closed it all down leaving 1,200 out of work and an environmental clean-up paid for by the UK tax-payer. They also raided the pension fund and drained it dry.
UK airports are owned by a Spanish company.
Scottish Power is owned by a Spanish company.
Most London buses are run by Spanish and German companies.
The Hinkley Point C nuclear power station to be built by French company EDF, part owned by the French government, using cheap Chinese steel that has catastrophically failed in other nuclear installations. Now EDF say the costs will be double or more and it will be very late even if it does come online.
Swindon was once our producer of rail locomotives and rolling stock. Not any more, it's Bombardier in Derby and due to their losses in the aviation market, that could see the end of the British railways manufacturing altogether even though Bombardier had EU grants to keep Derby going which they diverted to their loss-making aviation side in Canada.
39% of British invention patents have been passed to foreign companies, many of them in the EU The Mini cars that Cameron stood in front of as an example of British engineering, are built by BMW mostly in Holland and Austria. His campaign bus was made in Germany even though we have Plaxton, Optare, Bluebird, Dennis etc., in the UK. The bicycle for the Greens was made in the far east, not by Raleigh UK but then they are probably going to move to the Netherlands too as they have said recently.

Anyone who thinks the EU is good for British industry or any other business simply hasn't paid attention to what has been systematically asset-stripped from the UK. Name me one major technology company still running in the UK, I used to contract out to many, then the work just dried up as they were sold off to companies from France, Germany, Holland, Belgium, etc., and now we don't even teach electronic technology for technicians any more, due to EU regulations.

I haven't detailed our non-existent fishing industry the EU paid to destroy, nor the farmers being paid NOT to produce food they could sell for more than they get paid to do nothing.
I haven't mentioned what it costs us to be asset-stripped like this, nor have I mentioned immigration, nor the risk to our security if control of our armed forces are passed to Brussels or Germany.

Find something that's gone the other way, I've looked and I just can't. If you think the EU is a good idea, 1/ You haven't read the party manifesto of The European Peoples' Party.
2/ You haven't had to deal with EU petty bureaucracy tearing your business down.
3/ You don't think it matters.

Scottish EU referendum poll:
Remain: 58% (-8)
Leave: 33% (+4)
(via Ipsos Mori, phone / 06 - 12 Jun)

Even the Scottish are beginning to realise that there no benefits to being inside the EU, as the Remain support hemorrhages at an alarming rate.

Tattie Scones RRN wrote:Just seen this on Twitter. I have no time to check but I wonder if it is indeed true??

Cadbury moved factory to Poland 2011 with EU grant.
Ford Transit moved to Turkey 2013 with EU grant.
Jaguar Land Rover has recently agreed to build a new plant in Slovakia with EU grant, owned by Tata, the same company who have trashed our steel works and emptied the workers pension funds.
Peugeot closed its Ryton (was Rootes Group) plant and moved production to Slovakia with EU grant.
British Army's new Ajax fighting vehicles to be built in SPAIN using SWEDISH steel at the request of the EU to support jobs in Spain with EU grant, rather than Wales.
Dyson gone to Malaysia, with an EU loan.
Crown Closures, Bournemouth (Was METAL BOX), gone to Poland with EU grant, once employed 1,200.
M&S manufacturing gone to far east with EU loan.
Hornby models gone. In fact all toys and models now gone from UK along with the patents all with with EU grants.
Gillette gone to eastern Europe with EU grant.
Texas Instruments Greenock gone to Germany with EU grant.
Indesit at Bodelwyddan Wales gone with EU grant.
Sekisui Alveo said production at its Merthyr Tydfil Industrial Park foam plant will relocate production to Roermond in the Netherlands, with EU funding.
Hoover Merthyr factory moved out of UK to Czech Republic and the Far East by Italian company Candy with EU backing.
ICI integration into Holland’s AkzoNobel with EU bank loan and within days of the merger, several factories in the UK, were closed, eliminating 3,500 jobs Boots sold to Italians Stefano Pessina who have based their HQ in Switzerland to avoid tax to the tune of £80 million a year, using an EU loan for the purchase.
JDS Uniphase run by two Dutch men, bought up companies in the UK with £20 million in EU 'regeneration' grants, created a pollution nightmare and just closed it all down leaving 1,200 out of work and an environmental clean-up paid for by the UK tax-payer. They also raided the pension fund and drained it dry.
UK airports are owned by a Spanish company.
Scottish Power is owned by a Spanish company.
Most London buses are run by Spanish and German companies.
The Hinkley Point C nuclear power station to be built by French company EDF, part owned by the French government, using cheap Chinese steel that has catastrophically failed in other nuclear installations. Now EDF say the costs will be double or more and it will be very late even if it does come online.
Swindon was once our producer of rail locomotives and rolling stock. Not any more, it's Bombardier in Derby and due to their losses in the aviation market, that could see the end of the British railways manufacturing altogether even though Bombardier had EU grants to keep Derby going which they diverted to their loss-making aviation side in Canada.
39% of British invention patents have been passed to foreign companies, many of them in the EU The Mini cars that Cameron stood in front of as an example of British engineering, are built by BMW mostly in Holland and Austria. His campaign bus was made in Germany even though we have Plaxton, Optare, Bluebird, Dennis etc., in the UK. The bicycle for the Greens was made in the far east, not by Raleigh UK but then they are probably going to move to the Netherlands too as they have said recently.

Anyone who thinks the EU is good for British industry or any other business simply hasn't paid attention to what has been systematically asset-stripped from the UK. Name me one major technology company still running in the UK, I used to contract out to many, then the work just dried up as they were sold off to companies from France, Germany, Holland, Belgium, etc., and now we don't even teach electronic technology for technicians any more, due to EU regulations.

I haven't detailed our non-existent fishing industry the EU paid to destroy, nor the farmers being paid NOT to produce food they could sell for more than they get paid to do nothing.
I haven't mentioned what it costs us to be asset-stripped like this, nor have I mentioned immigration, nor the risk to our security if control of our armed forces are passed to Brussels or Germany.

Find something that's gone the other way, I've looked and I just can't. If you think the EU is a good idea, 1/ You haven't read the party manifesto of The European Peoples' Party.
2/ You haven't had to deal with EU petty bureaucracy tearing your business down.
3/ You don't think it matters.

Dyson gone to Malaysia, with an EU loan. That invalidates everything else. What a stupid c*nt whoever made up that nonsense.

Nore Staat wrote:As the referendum vote is about the future it is impossible to provide facts.  

Economists who failed to foresee the 2008 financial crisis face scepticism about their forecastings of the consequences of leaving or remaining.

But of course leaders can influence the market by declaring trade wars.  They are threatening a trade war in order to deny me my democratic choice in this referendum.

That's a non sequitur.

If we leave the EU then we will no longer be a member of the EU. We won't have to pay the membership fee, but we'll no longer be entitled to the membership benefits.

Those are statements of the future, and factually accurate.

Also, just to pick up on this rather odd train of thought you have about wars. No-one is trying to deny you your choice in this referendum. David Cameron et al are the very people who have presented this choice to you in the first place. What they are seeking to explain to you are the risks of choosing to vote Leave. That is not coercion or blackmail, or denying you your democratic right. It is simply warning you of the consequences of taking one particular option. If you want the risks of Remain and the pros of Leave explained to you, just go to the official website for Leave and there will be information available. You can then take the information provided by both sides and make an informed choice. Good luck to you.

Duty281 wrote:Scottish EU referendum poll:
Remain: 58% (-8)
Leave: 33% (+4)
(via Ipsos Mori, phone / 06 - 12 Jun)

Even the Scottish are beginning to realise that there no benefits to being inside the EU, as the Remain support hemorrhages at an alarming rate.

That's still a pretty hefty lead. I would be absolutely staggered if Scotland were to vote in favour of Leave. Still, the silver lining would be no referendum on Scottish Independence. The Nats could hardly argue that we were pulled out of the EU against our wishes if we actually voted for the same outcome. They'd probably try mind you.

Did duty explain his endorsement of open Europesource plan?

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:As the referendum vote is about the future it is impossible to provide facts.  

Economists who failed to foresee the 2008 financial crisis face scepticism about their forecastings of the consequences of leaving or remaining.

But of course leaders can influence the market by declaring trade wars.  They are threatening a trade war in order to deny me my democratic choice in this referendum.

That's a non sequitur.

If we leave the EU then we will no longer be a member of the EU. We won't have to pay the membership fee, but we'll no longer be entitled to the membership benefits.

Those are statements of the future, and factually accurate.

Also, just to pick up on this rather odd train of thought you have about wars. No-one is trying to deny you your choice in this referendum. David Cameron et al are the very people who have presented this choice to you in the first place. What they are seeking to explain to you are the risks of choosing to vote Leave. That is not coercion or blackmail, or denying you your democratic right. It is simply warning you of the consequences of taking one particular option. If you want the risks of Remain and the pros of Leave explained to you, just go to the official website for Leave and there will be information available. You can then take the information provided by both sides and make an informed choice. Good luck to you.

Don't agree. It's very clearly playing on the fears of the voting public. The implication being that 'if you vote Brexit, you may be responsible for war'. It's nonsense and it's nonsense because the UK's voice on these matters is not within the confines of the European Union but NATO.

Tattie - what the article is basically saying is that numerous businesses in the UK have taken advantage of cheaper labour elsewhere in the EU (and outside the EU of course) for production, and the EU grants which are available in order to make the switch.

This is hardly news. It's a rather global trend don't you think, manufacturing and production being carried out in jurisdictions where it is most cost effective? We do the same in the UK on a smaller scale, it's called regional policy. On a global scale you'll see most products on our shelves being manufactured in places like Taiwan, Vietnam and China. UK businesses are free to make their products in the UK, but it'll cost a lot more because of UK legislation such as the living wage and workers' rights, plus the protection offered by Trade Unions. Why do you think so many businesses outsource customer services to call centres in India? You can't blame the EU for that, you'll have to look closer to home. You have to blame the work of the Liberal Party governments from Gladstone through to the early 20th Century, and the Labour movement of the 20th Century which slowly but surely forced business to meet certain requirements regarding their workforce. You'll have to blame New Labour for introducing a minimum wage, and Thatcher/Major/Blair for pesky economic prosperity which guaranteed a lifestyle for millions in this country that meant they wouldn't be prepared to work night and day making stuff.

Whether we vote Remain or vote Leave, UK businesses will still look to be as profitable as possible.

As for the piece at the end:

Find something that's gone the other way, I've looked and I just can't. If you think the EU is a good idea:
1/ You haven't read the party manifesto of The European Peoples' Party.

No, I haven't. What does it say and why is it relevant to anything? It's a Christian/Conservative Group in Europe, consistent of MEPs of affiliated parties. Why would they influence my vote to Remain or Leave?

2/ You haven't had to deal with EU petty bureaucracy tearing your business down.

No, I haven't. I don't run a business. The vast majority of businesses and industry bodies in the UK, and the Institute of Directors, are supporting Remain.

3/ You don't think it matters.

I do think it matters. It matters greatly.

Is there a 4th option? This seems rather shallow and simplistic otherwise.

Duty281 wrote:Scottish EU referendum poll:
Remain: 58% (-8)
Leave: 33% (+4)
(via Ipsos Mori, phone / 06 - 12 Jun)

Even the Scottish are beginning to realise that there no benefits to being inside the EU, as the Remain support hemorrhages at an alarming rate.

"Even the Scottish..."? That sounds a bit racist, doesn't it?

Munchkin wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:As the referendum vote is about the future it is impossible to provide facts.  

Economists who failed to foresee the 2008 financial crisis face scepticism about their forecastings of the consequences of leaving or remaining.

But of course leaders can influence the market by declaring trade wars.  They are threatening a trade war in order to deny me my democratic choice in this referendum.

That's a non sequitur.

If we leave the EU then we will no longer be a member of the EU. We won't have to pay the membership fee, but we'll no longer be entitled to the membership benefits.

Those are statements of the future, and factually accurate.

Also, just to pick up on this rather odd train of thought you have about wars. No-one is trying to deny you your choice in this referendum. David Cameron et al are the very people who have presented this choice to you in the first place. What they are seeking to explain to you are the risks of choosing to vote Leave. That is not coercion or blackmail, or denying you your democratic right. It is simply warning you of the consequences of taking one particular option. If you want the risks of Remain and the pros of Leave explained to you, just go to the official website for Leave and there will be information available. You can then take the information provided by both sides and make an informed choice. Good luck to you.

Don't agree. It's very clearly playing on the fears of the voting public. The implication being that 'if you vote Brexit, you may be responsible for war'. It's nonsense and it's nonsense because the UK's voice on these matters is not within the confines of the European Union but NATO.

I think you're being a bit soft. The Vote Leave campaign suggested earlier this week that a Remain vote would encourage Orlando style shootings in the UK, and would endorse "free movement of the Kalashnikov". Clearly that's just loopy, and I certainly didn't feel coerced or blackmailed into voting Leave, I just pitied those who genuinely believed that to be true.

Anyway, who in the official Remain camp has said that "if you vote Brexit, you may be responsible for war"? It's clearly a silly thing to say, but I can't find the quote.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Scottish EU referendum poll:
Remain: 58% (-8)
Leave: 33% (+4)
(via Ipsos Mori, phone / 06 - 12 Jun)

Even the Scottish are beginning to realise that there no benefits to being inside the EU, as the Remain support hemorrhages at an alarming rate.

"Even the Scottish..."? That sounds a bit racist, doesn't it?

We'll get over it......despite being slightly slow off the mark....

The Sandal Bomber wrote:Did duty explain his endorsement of open Europesource plan?

Duty281 wrote:Except our economy does not benefit from being in the EU.

This country had the 4th largest economy in the world in 1960 - this similar level has always been achieved with or without the EU. Our trade has certainly been harmed by being in the EU - no free trade with the USA, Canada or India, to name just a few.

Open Europe - the only truly independent economic organisation - get it right when they say that Leaving will make a negligible difference to our economy. The ones in the pocket of the EU, with dodgy track records - like the CBI or the IMF - will always pretend otherwise.

There are no benefits to being in the EU which Greece - once home to the greatest civilisation that our species has ever known - have found out to a devastating degree.

There you go.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

The Sandal Bomber wrote:Did duty explain his endorsement of open Europesource plan?

Duty281 wrote:Except our economy does not benefit from being in the EU.

This country had the 4th largest economy in the world in 1960 - this similar level has always been achieved with or without the EU. Our trade has certainly been harmed by being in the EU - no free trade with the USA, Canada or India, to name just a few.

Open Europe - the only truly independent economic organisation - get it right when they say that Leaving will make a negligible difference to our economy. The ones in the pocket of the EU, with dodgy track records - like the CBI or the IMF - will always pretend otherwise.

There are no benefits to being in the EU which Greece - once home to the greatest civilisation that our species has ever known - have found out to a devastating degree.

There you go.

I meant any rebuttal to the points you raised. Just want to see if he actually read what he endorsed.

The Sandal Bomber wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

The Sandal Bomber wrote:Did duty explain his endorsement of open Europesource plan?

Duty281 wrote:Except our economy does not benefit from being in the EU.

This country had the 4th largest economy in the world in 1960 - this similar level has always been achieved with or without the EU. Our trade has certainly been harmed by being in the EU - no free trade with the USA, Canada or India, to name just a few.

Open Europe - the only truly independent economic organisation - get it right when they say that Leaving will make a negligible difference to our economy. The ones in the pocket of the EU, with dodgy track records - like the CBI or the IMF - will always pretend otherwise.

There are no benefits to being in the EU which Greece - once home to the greatest civilisation that our species has ever known - have found out to a devastating degree.

There you go.

I meant any rebuttal to the points you raised. Just want to see if he actually read what he endorsed.

Nope. I wait with bated breath.

Look. This is a hugeeeeeee thread, I have no idea where anything is.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:As the referendum vote is about the future it is impossible to provide facts.  

Economists who failed to foresee the 2008 financial crisis face scepticism about their forecastings of the consequences of leaving or remaining.

But of course leaders can influence the market by declaring trade wars.  They are threatening a trade war in order to deny me my democratic choice in this referendum.

That's a non sequitur.

If we leave the EU then we will no longer be a member of the EU. We won't have to pay the membership fee, but we'll no longer be entitled to the membership benefits.

Those are statements of the future, and factually accurate.

Also, just to pick up on this rather odd train of thought you have about wars. No-one is trying to deny you your choice in this referendum. David Cameron et al are the very people who have presented this choice to you in the first place. What they are seeking to explain to you are the risks of choosing to vote Leave. That is not coercion or blackmail, or denying you your democratic right. It is simply warning you of the consequences of taking one particular option. If you want the risks of Remain and the pros of Leave explained to you, just go to the official website for Leave and there will be information available. You can then take the information provided by both sides and make an informed choice. Good luck to you.

Don't agree. It's very clearly playing on the fears of the voting public. The implication being that 'if you vote Brexit, you may be responsible for war'. It's nonsense and it's nonsense because the UK's voice on these matters is not within the confines of the European Union but NATO.

I think you're being a bit soft. The Vote Leave campaign suggested earlier this week that a Remain vote would encourage Orlando style shootings in the UK, and would endorse "free movement of the Kalashnikov". Clearly that's just loopy, and I certainly didn't feel coerced or blackmailed into voting Leave, I just pitied those who genuinely believed that to be true.

Anyway, who in the official Remain camp has said that "if you vote Brexit, you may be responsible for war"? It's clearly a silly thing to say, but I can't find the quote.

In what way am I being 'soft'? If pointing to the fact that the Remain campaign (Cameron) did employ fear tactics to frighten the voters into Remain is somehow 'soft', then I will gladly accept it.

I notice that rather than counter my argument you engage in 'whataboutery'. Fair enough if you didn't read, or hear, Cameron's little speech on the dangers of destabilising Europe, during which he evoked the memory of WW1 and WW2, but I suspect you're being a tad disingenuous.
What Brexit may have claimed about Orlando style shootings has no bearing on the fact that Remain are employing scare tactics to manipulate the will of the people.

I am for Remain, but I will call BS when I see it. Hyperbole, lies and fearmongering will not win them the vote. Brexit may win because of it.

Duty281 wrote:Look. This is a hugeeeeeee thread, I have no idea where anything is.

Have you checked your other suit?

Munchkin wrote:

Don't agree. It's very clearly playing on the fears of the voting public. The implication being that 'if you vote Brexit, you may be responsible for war'. It's nonsense and it's nonsense because the UK's voice on these matters is not within the confines of the European Union but NATO.

The fact is, if Britain leaves the EU, there may be a slight reduction in the high levels of security we currently enjoy. Generally Europe has been more secure when the UK has been positively engaged - whether it's defeating Napoleon, Hitler or helping to see off the Soviet Union. A shrunken, diminished Britain - perhaps reduced to an isolated irrelevant England, would not be in such a strong position to contribute to stability in Europe.

That doesn't mean Russia will occupy Scotland the day after Brexit. But it makes the long term outlook less secure.

Scotland leaving the UK and the resultant potential damage to the Navy would be a bigger issue - and it may happen if the UK leave the EU. That was one reason why the US was not welcoming to Scottish Independence and they're also not happy about the prospect of a Brexit. They will be losing their most important ally.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Look. This is a hugeeeeeee thread, I have no idea where anything is.

Have you checked your other suit?

All I've found is a few betting slips, half a bacon sandwich and Godfrey Bloom.

Alex_Germany wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Don't agree. It's very clearly playing on the fears of the voting public. The implication being that 'if you vote Brexit, you may be responsible for war'. It's nonsense and it's nonsense because the UK's voice on these matters is not within the confines of the European Union but NATO.

The fact is, if Britain leaves the EU, there may be a slight reduction in the high levels of security we currently enjoy. Generally Europe has been more secure when the UK has been positively engaged - whether it's defeating Napoleon, Hitler or helping to see off the Soviet Union. A shrunken, diminished Britain - perhaps reduced to an isolated irrelevant England, would not be in such a strong position to contribute to stability in Europe.

That doesn't mean Russia will occupy Scotland the day after Brexit. But it makes the long term outlook less secure.

Scotland leaving the UK and the resultant potential damage to the Navy would be a bigger issue - and it may happen if the UK leave the EU. That was one reason why the US was not welcoming to Scottish Independence and they're also not happy about the prospect of a Brexit. They will be losing their most important ally.

Permanent members of the UN Security Council. Members of Nato. Nuclear weapons.

The EU is an utter irrelevance in terms of security, though it strives to change that through the means of an EU army.

It seems to me the reason to vote remain is purely a fear of disrupting trade relationships and the financial markets.  But I am voting for retention (and clawback) of democracy and sovereignty - these matter more to me.  I could always emigrate to another country if a trade war broke out in Europe.  What I don't like is the deception of this referendum, with Cameron saying we have to vote to remain, after he said he would campaign for the out vote if he didn't get his minor reforms.   People always predict Armageddon as an excuse to avoid change.  The higher education sector predicted Armageddon with respect to student numbers when the government tripled tuition fees.  Numbers actually went up.

Munchkin wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:As the referendum vote is about the future it is impossible to provide facts.  

Economists who failed to foresee the 2008 financial crisis face scepticism about their forecastings of the consequences of leaving or remaining.

But of course leaders can influence the market by declaring trade wars.  They are threatening a trade war in order to deny me my democratic choice in this referendum.

That's a non sequitur.

If we leave the EU then we will no longer be a member of the EU. We won't have to pay the membership fee, but we'll no longer be entitled to the membership benefits.

Those are statements of the future, and factually accurate.

Also, just to pick up on this rather odd train of thought you have about wars. No-one is trying to deny you your choice in this referendum. David Cameron et al are the very people who have presented this choice to you in the first place. What they are seeking to explain to you are the risks of choosing to vote Leave. That is not coercion or blackmail, or denying you your democratic right. It is simply warning you of the consequences of taking one particular option. If you want the risks of Remain and the pros of Leave explained to you, just go to the official website for Leave and there will be information available. You can then take the information provided by both sides and make an informed choice. Good luck to you.

Don't agree. It's very clearly playing on the fears of the voting public. The implication being that 'if you vote Brexit, you may be responsible for war'. It's nonsense and it's nonsense because the UK's voice on these matters is not within the confines of the European Union but NATO.

I think you're being a bit soft. The Vote Leave campaign suggested earlier this week that a Remain vote would encourage Orlando style shootings in the UK, and would endorse "free movement of the Kalashnikov". Clearly that's just loopy, and I certainly didn't feel coerced or blackmailed into voting Leave, I just pitied those who genuinely believed that to be true.

Anyway, who in the official Remain camp has said that "if you vote Brexit, you may be responsible for war"? It's clearly a silly thing to say, but I can't find the quote.

In what way am I being 'soft'? If pointing to the fact that the Remain campaign (Cameron) did employ fear tactics to frighten the voters into Remain is somehow 'soft', then I will gladly accept it.

I notice that rather than counter my argument you engage in 'whataboutery'. Fair enough if you didn't read, or hear, Cameron's little speech on the dangers of destabilising Europe, during which he evoked the memory of WW1 and WW2, but I suspect you're being a tad disingenuous.
What Brexit may have claimed about Orlando style shootings has no bearing on the fact that Remain are employing scare tactics to manipulate the will of the people. I am for Remain, but I will call BS when I see it. Hyperbole, lies and fearmongering will not win them the vote. Brexit may win because of it.

I said that the Remain camp isn't using "coercion or blackmail", and you said you disagreed, saying that they are playing on people's fears (no more incidentally than the Leave campaign, as I pointed out for you). I personally think it is soft to feel "coerced and blackmailed" just because campaigners are telling you negative consequences of voting a particular way.

I didn't hear Cameron say that "if you vote Brexit, you may be responsible for war". You put that in quotation marks, and I can't find the quote. I think you may be referring to his comments as to the role played by the EU in bringing peace and stability to Europe. Whilst I agree with that in principle (the EU won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2012), I personally don't see the major relevance to this debate. We are not voting to end the EU, we are voting on whether to leave it or stay. I think we are being pretty arrogant if we think it won't survive without us.

I also don't see why Cameron's comments are relevant, and constitute "hyperbole, lies and fearmongering", whereas the Leave comments re: "free movement of the Kalashnikov" (which are utterly ludicrous) have no bearing.

We're starting to see double standards, and it's happening across the media.

Nore Staat wrote:It seems to me the reason to vote remain is purely a fear of disrupting trade relationships and the financial markets.  But I am voting for retention of democracy and sovereignty - these matter more to me.  I could always emigrate to another country if a trade war broke out in Europe.  What I don't like is the deception of this referendum, with Cameron saying we have to vote to remain, after he said he would campaign for the out vote if he didn't get his minor reforms.   People always predict Armageddon as an excuse to avoid change.  The higher education sector predicted Armageddon with respect to student numbers when the government tripled tuition fees.  Numbers actually went up.

I posted this earlier, but you really should have a read:

http://www.strongerin.co.uk/get_the_facts

There are plenty very positive reasons to vote Remain that have nothing to do with trade and financial markets.

Duty281 wrote:
The EU is an utter irrelevance in terms of security, though it strives to change that through the means of an EU army.

Landlocked Nations want an Ocean to call their own... EU Navy.

And Nore you still haven't provided any specifics as to which laws you think are impugning upon our sovereignty.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:It seems to me the reason to vote remain is purely a fear of disrupting trade relationships and the financial markets.  But I am voting for retention of democracy and sovereignty - these matter more to me.  I could always emigrate to another country if a trade war broke out in Europe.  What I don't like is the deception of this referendum, with Cameron saying we have to vote to remain, after he said he would campaign for the out vote if he didn't get his minor reforms.   People always predict Armageddon as an excuse to avoid change.  The higher education sector predicted Armageddon with respect to student numbers when the government tripled tuition fees.  Numbers actually went up.

I posted this earlier, but you really should have a read:

http://www.strongerin.co.uk/get_the_facts

There are plenty very positive reasons to vote Remain that have nothing to do with trade and financial markets.

Just proves what I said earlier - there are no benefits to being in the EU.

Lie after lie, backed up with some dubious statistics quoted from EU-funded organisations.

"Leave leaders including Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Nigel Farage have famously campaigned for privatisation of the NHS."

When? When have they ever done this?

"Being in the EU gives you the right to paid holiday leave, maximum working hours, equal treatment for men and women, rights for part-time workers, health and safety standards at work, parental leave and protection against discrimination based on sex, race, religion, age, disability and sexual orientation."

No it fu**ing doesn't. TopHat posted the poster on here which proves what a load of rubbish this is.

"We would lose our say on climate change regulations, trade regulations, the economy and security, meaning less influence on the world you and your family live in."

No we wouldn't. UN, WTO, Nato, Council of Europe etc.

After two years, the UK would automatically lose access to all arrangements with the EU, including trade deals, EU funding and rights to free travel, unless all EU states agree to extend talks.

Just wrong. We will probably negotiate a deal in that two years.

I could go on and on. These are outrageous lies, by a pathetic campaign.

Alex_Germany wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Don't agree. It's very clearly playing on the fears of the voting public. The implication being that 'if you vote Brexit, you may be responsible for war'. It's nonsense and it's nonsense because the UK's voice on these matters is not within the confines of the European Union but NATO.

The fact is, if Britain leaves the EU, there may be a slight reduction in the high levels of security we currently enjoy. Generally Europe has been more secure when the UK has been positively engaged - whether it's defeating Napoleon, Hitler or helping to see off the Soviet Union. A shrunken, diminished Britain - perhaps reduced to an isolated irrelevant England, would not be in such a strong position to contribute to stability in Europe.

That doesn't mean Russia will occupy Scotland the day after Brexit. But it makes the long term outlook less secure.

Scotland leaving the UK and the resultant potential damage to the Navy would be a bigger issue - and it may happen if the UK leave the EU. That was one reason why the US was not welcoming to Scottish Independence and they're also not happy about the prospect of a Brexit. They will be losing their most important ally.

Sorry, Alex, but do you actually believe all that yourself? Really?

Why would there be a slight reduction in security? The 'positive engagement' of the UK is within NATO, not the EU. Intelligence partnerships will be effected in no way by a Brexit. There is no good reason why it should, especially considering our strongest partner is the US, and possibly Israel.

The thought of Russia occupying Scotland is conjuring up many funny images in my head..... Anyway, Scotland leaving the UK should not damage the Navy, or threaten security. I am very sure the Scots would be very willing to jointly agree to any strategic measures providing security to Britain, bar harbouring Trident.

The US will not lose their most important ally in the event of a Brexit win. The 'special relationship' isn't a warm fluffy thing dependent on remaining in Europe. It's a relationship built on intelligence sharing and diplomatic support. That won't change.

Duty281 wrote:

Permanent members of the UN Security Council. Members of Nato. Nuclear weapons.

The EU is an utter irrelevance in terms of security, though it strives to change that through the means of an EU army.

Yes, the EU is irrelevance in security terms - which is why Europe is more stable and secure when the UK is engaged in Europe, and when the UK is strong and prosperous.

A Brexit threatens all three.

The Sandal Bomber wrote:And Nore you still haven't provided any specifics as to which laws you think are impugning upon our sovereignty.

Because he can't.

Duty281 wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:It seems to me the reason to vote remain is purely a fear of disrupting trade relationships and the financial markets.  But I am voting for retention of democracy and sovereignty - these matter more to me.  I could always emigrate to another country if a trade war broke out in Europe.  What I don't like is the deception of this referendum, with Cameron saying we have to vote to remain, after he said he would campaign for the out vote if he didn't get his minor reforms.   People always predict Armageddon as an excuse to avoid change.  The higher education sector predicted Armageddon with respect to student numbers when the government tripled tuition fees.  Numbers actually went up.

I posted this earlier, but you really should have a read:

http://www.strongerin.co.uk/get_the_facts

There are plenty very positive reasons to vote Remain that have nothing to do with trade and financial markets.

Just proves what I said earlier - there are no benefits to being in the EU.

Lie after lie, backed up with some dubious statistics quoted from EU-funded organisations.

"Leave leaders including Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Nigel Farage have famously campaigned for privatisation of the NHS."

When? When have they ever done this?

"Being in the EU gives you the right to paid holiday leave, maximum working hours, equal treatment for men and women, rights for part-time workers, health and safety standards at work, parental leave and protection against discrimination based on sex, race, religion, age, disability and sexual orientation."

No it fu**ing doesn't. TopHat posted the poster on here which proves what a load of rubbish this is.

"We would lose our say on climate change regulations, trade regulations, the economy and security, meaning less influence on the world you and your family live in."

No we wouldn't. UN, WTO, Nato, Council of Europe etc.

After two years, the UK would automatically lose access to all arrangements with the EU, including trade deals, EU funding and rights to free travel, unless all EU states agree to extend talks.

Just wrong. We will probably negotiate a deal in that two years.

I could go on and on. These are outrageous lies, by a pathetic campaign.

Agreed - our HASaWA 74 was actually copied by the Europeans. Our H&S legislation was nothing to do with Brussels.

Duty281 wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:It seems to me the reason to vote remain is purely a fear of disrupting trade relationships and the financial markets.  But I am voting for retention of democracy and sovereignty - these matter more to me.  I could always emigrate to another country if a trade war broke out in Europe.  What I don't like is the deception of this referendum, with Cameron saying we have to vote to remain, after he said he would campaign for the out vote if he didn't get his minor reforms.   People always predict Armageddon as an excuse to avoid change.  The higher education sector predicted Armageddon with respect to student numbers when the government tripled tuition fees.  Numbers actually went up.

I posted this earlier, but you really should have a read:

http://www.strongerin.co.uk/get_the_facts

There are plenty very positive reasons to vote Remain that have nothing to do with trade and financial markets.

Just proves what I said earlier - there are no benefits to being in the EU.

Lie after lie, backed up with some dubious statistics quoted from EU-funded organisations.

"Leave leaders including Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Nigel Farage have famously campaigned for privatisation of the NHS."

When? When have they ever done this?

"Being in the EU gives you the right to paid holiday leave, maximum working hours, equal treatment for men and women, rights for part-time workers, health and safety standards at work, parental leave and protection against discrimination based on sex, race, religion, age, disability and sexual orientation."

No it fu**ing doesn't. TopHat posted the poster on here which proves what a load of rubbish this is.

"We would lose our say on climate change regulations, trade regulations, the economy and security, meaning less influence on the world you and your family live in."

No we wouldn't. UN, WTO, Nato, Council of Europe etc.

After two years, the UK would automatically lose access to all arrangements with the EU, including trade deals, EU funding and rights to free travel, unless all EU states agree to extend talks.

Just wrong. We will probably negotiate a deal in that two years.

I could go on and on. These are outrageous lies, by a pathetic campaign.

From 2009:
David Cameron was facing a battle to restore party unity behind his health policy last night after it emerged that several of his key shadow cabinet members put their names to a manifesto criticising the NHS and calling for it in effect to be dismantled.
The Observer can reveal that leading Tory MPs – who include Cameron's close ally Michael Gove – are listed alongside controversial MEP Daniel Hannan as co-authors of a book, Direct Democracy, which says the NHS "fails to meet public expectations" and is "no longer relevant in the 21st century".

Hero wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:It seems to me the reason to vote remain is purely a fear of disrupting trade relationships and the financial markets.  But I am voting for retention of democracy and sovereignty - these matter more to me.  I could always emigrate to another country if a trade war broke out in Europe.  What I don't like is the deception of this referendum, with Cameron saying we have to vote to remain, after he said he would campaign for the out vote if he didn't get his minor reforms.   People always predict Armageddon as an excuse to avoid change.  The higher education sector predicted Armageddon with respect to student numbers when the government tripled tuition fees.  Numbers actually went up.

I posted this earlier, but you really should have a read:

http://www.strongerin.co.uk/get_the_facts

There are plenty very positive reasons to vote Remain that have nothing to do with trade and financial markets.

Just proves what I said earlier - there are no benefits to being in the EU.

Lie after lie, backed up with some dubious statistics quoted from EU-funded organisations.

"Leave leaders including Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Nigel Farage have famously campaigned for privatisation of the NHS."

When? When have they ever done this?

"Being in the EU gives you the right to paid holiday leave, maximum working hours, equal treatment for men and women, rights for part-time workers, health and safety standards at work, parental leave and protection against discrimination based on sex, race, religion, age, disability and sexual orientation."

No it fu**ing doesn't. TopHat posted the poster on here which proves what a load of rubbish this is.

"We would lose our say on climate change regulations, trade regulations, the economy and security, meaning less influence on the world you and your family live in."

No we wouldn't. UN, WTO, Nato, Council of Europe etc.

After two years, the UK would automatically lose access to all arrangements with the EU, including trade deals, EU funding and rights to free travel, unless all EU states agree to extend talks.

Just wrong. We will probably negotiate a deal in that two years.

I could go on and on. These are outrageous lies, by a pathetic campaign.

From 2009:
David Cameron was facing a battle to restore party unity behind his health policy last night after it emerged that several of his key shadow cabinet members put their names to a manifesto criticising the NHS and calling for it in effect to be dismantled.
The Observer can reveal that leading Tory MPs – who include Cameron's close ally Michael Gove – are listed alongside controversial MEP Daniel Hannan as co-authors of a book, Direct Democracy, which says the NHS "fails to meet public expectations" and is "no longer relevant in the 21st century".

And the other two?

Munchkin wrote:

Why would there be a slight reduction in security? The 'positive engagement' of the UK is within NATO, not the EU. Intelligence partnerships will be effected in no way by a Brexit. There is no good reason why it should, especially considering our strongest partner is the US, and possibly Israel.

The thought of Russia occupying Scotland is conjuring up many funny images in my head..... Anyway, Scotland leaving the UK should not damage the Navy, or threaten security. I am very sure the Scots would be very willing to jointly agree to any strategic measures providing security to Britain, bar harbouring Trident.

The US will not lose their most important ally in the event of a Brexit win. The 'special relationship' isn't a warm fluffy thing dependent on remaining in Europe. It's a relationship built on intelligence sharing and diplomatic support. That won't change.

As I said above, Europe is - and has been since about the Seven Years War, more secure and stable when Britain is
1. Engaged with Europe
2. Prosperous
3. Strong, based on that prosperity.

The special relationship - if it exists - is based on the UK being a positive and influential ally. Currently, the USA's most important ally. Obama has been as clear as he can be without being rude: Outside the EU, the UK is not as important. When a President wants to "call Europe", it will be Berlin on the line.

At the same time, a Brexit will impact Britain's ability to spend on its defence - which again, makes it less useful to the USA. That will be especially the case if Scotland leaves and is able to scupper Trident.

Duty281 wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:It seems to me the reason to vote remain is purely a fear of disrupting trade relationships and the financial markets.  But I am voting for retention of democracy and sovereignty - these matter more to me.  I could always emigrate to another country if a trade war broke out in Europe.  What I don't like is the deception of this referendum, with Cameron saying we have to vote to remain, after he said he would campaign for the out vote if he didn't get his minor reforms.   People always predict Armageddon as an excuse to avoid change.  The higher education sector predicted Armageddon with respect to student numbers when the government tripled tuition fees.  Numbers actually went up.

I posted this earlier, but you really should have a read:

http://www.strongerin.co.uk/get_the_facts

There are plenty very positive reasons to vote Remain that have nothing to do with trade and financial markets.

Just proves what I said earlier - there are no benefits to being in the EU.

Lie after lie, backed up with some dubious statistics quoted from EU-funded organisations.

"Leave leaders including Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Nigel Farage have famously campaigned for privatisation of the NHS."

When? When have they ever done this?

"Being in the EU gives you the right to paid holiday leave, maximum working hours, equal treatment for men and women, rights for part-time workers, health and safety standards at work, parental leave and protection against discrimination based on sex, race, religion, age, disability and sexual orientation."

No it fu**ing doesn't. TopHat posted the poster on here which proves what a load of rubbish this is.

"We would lose our say on climate change regulations, trade regulations, the economy and security, meaning less influence on the world you and your family live in."

No we wouldn't. UN, WTO, Nato, Council of Europe etc.

After two years, the UK would automatically lose access to all arrangements with the EU, including trade deals, EU funding and rights to free travel, unless all EU states agree to extend talks.

Just wrong. We will probably negotiate a deal in that two years.

I could go on and on. These are outrageous lies, by a pathetic campaign.

Gove signed that book with hunt the c*nt about how to dismantle the NHS

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/12/film-nigel-farage-insurance-based-nhs-private-companies

And as for workers right's either you were lying and used that Open europe report to sound more informed than you are or you're being a hypocrite. Because for that report you endorsed to work, it hinges upon the scrapping of all of those rights to save money. So which is it?

Duty281 wrote:

Hero wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:It seems to me the reason to vote remain is purely a fear of disrupting trade relationships and the financial markets.  But I am voting for retention of democracy and sovereignty - these matter more to me.  I could always emigrate to another country if a trade war broke out in Europe.  What I don't like is the deception of this referendum, with Cameron saying we have to vote to remain, after he said he would campaign for the out vote if he didn't get his minor reforms.   People always predict Armageddon as an excuse to avoid change.  The higher education sector predicted Armageddon with respect to student numbers when the government tripled tuition fees.  Numbers actually went up.

I posted this earlier, but you really should have a read:

http://www.strongerin.co.uk/get_the_facts

There are plenty very positive reasons to vote Remain that have nothing to do with trade and financial markets.

Just proves what I said earlier - there are no benefits to being in the EU.

Lie after lie, backed up with some dubious statistics quoted from EU-funded organisations.

"Leave leaders including Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Nigel Farage have famously campaigned for privatisation of the NHS."

When? When have they ever done this?

"Being in the EU gives you the right to paid holiday leave, maximum working hours, equal treatment for men and women, rights for part-time workers, health and safety standards at work, parental leave and protection against discrimination based on sex, race, religion, age, disability and sexual orientation."

No it fu**ing doesn't. TopHat posted the poster on here which proves what a load of rubbish this is.

"We would lose our say on climate change regulations, trade regulations, the economy and security, meaning less influence on the world you and your family live in."

No we wouldn't. UN, WTO, Nato, Council of Europe etc.

After two years, the UK would automatically lose access to all arrangements with the EU, including trade deals, EU funding and rights to free travel, unless all EU states agree to extend talks.

Just wrong. We will probably negotiate a deal in that two years.

I could go on and on. These are outrageous lies, by a pathetic campaign.

From 2009:
David Cameron was facing a battle to restore party unity behind his health policy last night after it emerged that several of his key shadow cabinet members put their names to a manifesto criticising the NHS and calling for it in effect to be dismantled.
The Observer can reveal that leading Tory MPs – who include Cameron's close ally Michael Gove – are listed alongside controversial MEP Daniel Hannan as co-authors of a book, Direct Democracy, which says the NHS "fails to meet public expectations" and is "no longer relevant in the 21st century".

And the other two?

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/12/film-nigel-farage-insurance-based-nhs-private-companies

I've got the boris one at home, will post if I get home early tonight.

Duty281 wrote:

Just proves what I said earlier - there are no benefits to being in the EU.

Lie after lie, backed up with some dubious statistics quoted from EU-funded organisations.

"Leave leaders including Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Nigel Farage have famously campaigned for privatisation of the NHS."

When? When have they ever done this?

They are probably referring to the book Direct Democracy, which was co-authored by Gove.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/aug/16/tory-mps-back-nhs-dismantling

The book is basically advocating a US style insurance based health service.

This is Farage on the topic, basically agreeing with the position in the book co-authored by Gove:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-caught-on-video-suggesting-the-nhs-should-be-run-privately-9857389.html

This is Boris Johnson, saying that the NHS should charge and not be free at the point of use:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-brexit-boris-johnson-vote-leave-leaders-have-advocated-charging-for-nhs-and-cutting-a6986631.html

Still, I point these out purely to give the basis upon which Remain are making the statements. I actually think it's a pretty weak point, as the NHS has already been under threat from privatisation initiatives under the current Tory government, regardless of our EU membership.

The fact of the matter is that any government who wishes to replace the NHS with either a charging at the point of use model, or an insurance model, will need to put it in their manifesto and seek a mandate for doing so. It'll then be up to the voters to choose. I don't think, therefore, a Leave vote actually adds to the threat of a privatised NHS. Voting Tory under any circumstances does that.

And on that "reduction in security" - some of the Brexiters - in scaremongering mode - are claiming / hoping that a Brexit could lead to the EU unravelling. If it were to happen, that would definitely increase stability, especially in the Balkans.

I think that is highly unlikely - too many see the benefits of the EU (though the Euro may not be so safe) - it's more a Brexit own-goal project fear.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:As the referendum vote is about the future it is impossible to provide facts.  

Economists who failed to foresee the 2008 financial crisis face scepticism about their forecastings of the consequences of leaving or remaining.

But of course leaders can influence the market by declaring trade wars.  They are threatening a trade war in order to deny me my democratic choice in this referendum.

That's a non sequitur.

If we leave the EU then we will no longer be a member of the EU. We won't have to pay the membership fee, but we'll no longer be entitled to the membership benefits.

Those are statements of the future, and factually accurate.

Also, just to pick up on this rather odd train of thought you have about wars. No-one is trying to deny you your choice in this referendum. David Cameron et al are the very people who have presented this choice to you in the first place. What they are seeking to explain to you are the risks of choosing to vote Leave. That is not coercion or blackmail, or denying you your democratic right. It is simply warning you of the consequences of taking one particular option. If you want the risks of Remain and the pros of Leave explained to you, just go to the official website for Leave and there will be information available. You can then take the information provided by both sides and make an informed choice. Good luck to you.

Don't agree. It's very clearly playing on the fears of the voting public. The implication being that 'if you vote Brexit, you may be responsible for war'. It's nonsense and it's nonsense because the UK's voice on these matters is not within the confines of the European Union but NATO.

I think you're being a bit soft. The Vote Leave campaign suggested earlier this week that a Remain vote would encourage Orlando style shootings in the UK, and would endorse "free movement of the Kalashnikov". Clearly that's just loopy, and I certainly didn't feel coerced or blackmailed into voting Leave, I just pitied those who genuinely believed that to be true.

Anyway, who in the official Remain camp has said that "if you vote Brexit, you may be responsible for war"? It's clearly a silly thing to say, but I can't find the quote.

In what way am I being 'soft'? If pointing to the fact that the Remain campaign (Cameron) did employ fear tactics to frighten the voters into Remain is somehow 'soft', then I will gladly accept it.

I notice that rather than counter my argument you engage in 'whataboutery'. Fair enough if you didn't read, or hear, Cameron's little speech on the dangers of destabilising Europe, during which he evoked the memory of WW1 and WW2, but I suspect you're being a tad disingenuous.
What Brexit may have claimed about Orlando style shootings has no bearing on the fact that Remain are employing scare tactics to manipulate the will of the people. I am for Remain, but I will call BS when I see it. Hyperbole, lies and fearmongering will not win them the vote. Brexit may win because of it.

I said that the Remain camp isn't using "coercion or blackmail", and you said you disagreed, saying that they are playing on people's fears (no more incidentally than the Leave campaign, as I pointed out for you). I personally think it is soft to feel "coerced and blackmailed" just because campaigners are telling you negative consequences of voting a particular way.

I didn't hear Cameron say that "if you vote Brexit, you may be responsible for war". You put that in quotation marks, and I can't find the quote. I think you may be referring to his comments as to the role played by the EU in bringing peace and stability to Europe. Whilst I agree with that in principle (the EU won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2012), I personally don't see the major relevance to this debate. We are not voting to end the EU, we are voting on whether to leave it or stay. I think we are being pretty arrogant if we think it won't survive without us.

I also don't see why Cameron's comments are relevant, and constitute "hyperbole, lies and fearmongering", whereas the Leave comments re: "free movement of the Kalashnikov" (which are utterly ludicrous) have no bearing.





We're starting to see double standards, and it's happening across the media.

I put the "if you vote Brexit, you may be responsible for war" after stating that this was the implication.....

You think it's being soft to be fearful of voting a particular way when someone tells you that vote may cause wars? Really? It is manipulating by fear - coercion. It is also BS because either voting IN or OUT will make sod all difference.

The double standards have been in evidence from the beginning. By the way, it isn't a double standard to support Remain and call them on their BS. I know you haven't said as much. Just making my point.

The Sandal Bomber wrote:And Nore you still haven't provided any specifics as to which laws you think are impugning upon our sovereignty.

Remainer's that feign ignorance that being part of the EU does not impact on Britain's sovereignty and democracy do not trump my democratic right to vote out in the Referendum.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/6198513/EU-is-Britain-still-a-sovereign-state.html

Duty281 wrote:

"Being in the EU gives you the right to paid holiday leave, maximum working hours, equal treatment for men and women, rights for part-time workers, health and safety standards at work, parental leave and protection against discrimination based on sex, race, religion, age, disability and sexual orientation."

No it fu**ing doesn't. TopHat posted the poster on here which proves what a load of rubbish this is.

You should read the deregulation section of the Open Europe report you endorsed earlier (it's Section 3.2.1 of their latest report). It sets out the EU legislation in these areas that we can deregulate from in order to make the gains required to offset the losses. It references items such as the Working Time Directive and the Agency Workers Directive, as well as decisions of the ECJ we'd be able to ignore.

Unless you are now saying that the report is wrong.

and speaking of Project Fear.....

Nore Staat wrote:

The Sandal Bomber wrote:And Nore you still haven't provided any specifics as to which laws you think are impugning upon our sovereignty.

Remainer's that feign ignorance that being part of the EU does not impact on Britain's sovereignty and democracy do not trump my democratic right to vote out in the Referendum.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/6198513/EU-is-Britain-still-a-sovereign-state.html

Alex_Germany wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Why would there be a slight reduction in security? The 'positive engagement' of the UK is within NATO, not the EU. Intelligence partnerships will be effected in no way by a Brexit. There is no good reason why it should, especially considering our strongest partner is the US, and possibly Israel.

The thought of Russia occupying Scotland is conjuring up many funny images in my head..... Anyway, Scotland leaving the UK should not damage the Navy, or threaten security. I am very sure the Scots would be very willing to jointly agree to any strategic measures providing security to Britain, bar harbouring Trident.

The US will not lose their most important ally in the event of a Brexit win. The 'special relationship' isn't a warm fluffy thing dependent on remaining in Europe. It's a relationship built on intelligence sharing and diplomatic support. That won't change.

As I said above, Europe is - and has been since about the Seven Years War, more secure and stable when Britain is
1. Engaged with Europe
2. Prosperous
3. Strong, based on that prosperity.

The special relationship - if it exists - is based on the UK being a positive and influential ally. Currently, the USA's most important ally. Obama has been as clear as he can be without being rude: Outside the EU, the UK is not as important. When a President wants to "call Europe", it will be Berlin on the line.

At the same time, a Brexit will impact Britain's ability to spend on its defence - which again, makes it less useful to the USA. That will be especially the case if Scotland leaves and is able to scupper Trident.

Why would the UK have to be disengaged with Europe? It wouldn't be. It would be very much engaged.

You claim about the 'special relationship' is simply wrong. It's a relationship based on the value of intelligence sharing and diplomatic support that the UK provides, and that will not be devalued by a Brexit win.

Obama saying something doesn't mean that something is right. He's out the door soon, and won't be held to his word.

Duty281 wrote:

After two years, the UK would automatically lose access to all arrangements with the EU, including trade deals, EU funding and rights to free travel, unless all EU states agree to extend talks.

Just wrong. We will probably negotiate a deal in that two years.

This is actually entirely correct. There is a two year time slot post Leave during which the existing relationship is unwound, although Chris Grayling has announced today that he'd like it to be quicker. There is no mechanism to extend this period without unanimous approval from EU Member States. This is true, and guarantees the Brexit you will have voted for within that period. It's in Article 50 of the Treaty.

Whether, during that period, we can also renegotiate a new relationship with the EU is up for debate. Gus O'Donnell doesn't think so, but I take comfort that you think we can, "probably".

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/negotiations-to-pull-britain-out-of-the-eu-could-last-a-whole-decade-former-head-of-the-civil-a6959271.html

Nore Staat wrote:

The Sandal Bomber wrote:And Nore you still haven't provided any specifics as to which laws you think are impugning upon our sovereignty.

Remainer's that feign ignorance that being part of the EU does not impact on Britain's sovereignty and democracy do not trump my democratic right to vote out in the Referendum.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/6198513/EU-is-Britain-still-a-sovereign-state.html

Again...which laws? I'm not doubting you, it's just you don't seem to know what exactly you're angry about.

The Sandal Bomber wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:

The Sandal Bomber wrote:And Nore you still haven't provided any specifics as to which laws you think are impugning upon our sovereignty.

Remainer's that feign ignorance that being part of the EU does not impact on Britain's sovereignty and democracy do not trump my democratic right to vote out in the Referendum.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/6198513/EU-is-Britain-still-a-sovereign-state.html

Again...which laws? I'm not doubting you, it's just you don't seem to know what exactly you're angry about.

I'm voting out. I am not going to waste my time on this thread any longer.

Munchkin wrote:

You think it's being soft to be fearful of voting a particular way when someone tells you that vote may cause wars? Really? It is manipulating by fear - coercion. It is also BS because either voting IN or OUT will make sod all difference.

The double standards have been in evidence from the beginning. By the way, it isn't a double standard to support Remain and call them on their BS. I know you haven't said as much. Just making my point.

I'll try this again.

1. No-one has said that if you vote for Brexit you will be responsible for causing wars. No-one has said this.

2. Yes, I think it is soft to glean such an implication and feel that you are being coerced and blackmailed. You are not. They are not threatening you nor are they forcing you to do anything. People around the world who are genuinely threatened and coerced come election time, such as in Zimbabwe, would certainly consider it soft!

Still, I do welcome Remain voters offering a critique of the campaign. I have done so myself on a number of occasions, particularly around the practice of putting precise numbers on things which are purely speculative (e.g. families will each be £x worse off etc.). I don't however rebuke the campaign for so called "scaremongering" as the Leave would call it. I do believe that a Leave vote will have a number of negative consequences for the UK, and calling these as you see them is not "scaremongering" at all. Their hope is that we just stop pointing out these inconvenience truths, but I'm delighted that Remain is showing no signs of relenting. Even if the UK does vote Leave, at least those of us voting Remain will have the very small consolation of saying I told you so.