Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

FUCK YES LET'S LEAVE GET HYPE YEY

Casual yes, let's leave and get independence done with

Meh, probably just scribble all over my vote ballot to spite tryhards

Casual no, let's remain and get integration done with

FUCK NO LET'S REMAIN GET CALM YEY

[Playergamer]

What the hell? People are suffering en masse, coming to you for help, and you turn them away because it'd somewhat inconvenience you?

Well, as an American, I can say that we're turning them away because they hate the west and want to kill us.

And as another American, I can say that that's bullshit.

Tell that to Cologne.

Cologne* speaking here: You're full of shit. Most of the perpetrators of the New Year's attacks were North African men who were in Germany illegally, not as refugees. Please note that Syria is not a North African country, and Syrians actually are refugees in the true meaning** of the word.

Ah, mea culpa then. American media pretty much jumped over the actual origin of the attackers, calling them "refugees," and pretty much only argued over whether this was a result of the refugee crisis, instead of actually, y'know, discussing what happened.

[mainiac]

My problem, as an American, is that the people in our government who want to let refugees in don't even want to enforce a simple background check. Not so much as a "have you taken part in terrorist summer camp?" question on a fucking checklist.

FFS Did you bother to even GODDAMN GOOGLE that bullshit?  Takes all of ten seconds to find.

We have a serious problem.  The right wing just lives in a fantasy la la land.  This is not healthy for democracy long term.

[Harry Baldman]

I am not saying all refugees are terrorists or rapists. But far, far too many are.

And anyway, why don't we just build refugee camps in the middle-east, instead of transporting these economic migrants all the way to the first-world?

That's the sort of thing that needs a statistic, though. How many? There are, say, pedophile crime rings in the UK composed of Middle Eastern folk, obviously, but I'm reasonably sure those weren't refugees for the most part (could be wrong, of course) and even if they were, that really only makes the refugees in question roughly as bad as the average UK MP in the 1980s, which, while pretty horrific, does not make a compelling case for the exclusion of all refugees any more than it speaks to a need for the abolishing of Parliament.

As for building them in the Middle East, the issue is most likely that you'd need to transport the refugees back in order to do this, since if I understand correctly they're refugees upon arrival. Sending them back would thus be slightly impractical, especially given the number that arrived, and perhaps more than a little inhumane.

It's probably a bit of a problem that the notion of a refugee and a Middle Eastern person are typically conflated. Hence 'immigrant' and 'refugee' are used interchangeably, and sometimes for people who aren't even immigrants.

[Radio Controlled]

From the Beeb: Brexit: Gibraltar in talks with Scotland to stay in EU

Also this story. Rather anecdotal, but still worth a read (though note that the Guardian seems very pro-remain, in case people wanna start paying me for being an obvious shill).
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/jun/27/brexit-family-rifts-parents-referendum-conflict-betrayal

Also saw this quote somewhere, couldn't help but laugh.

It may be that this was a brilliant ploy to prevent immigrants from taking jobs by removing all the jobs.

[Harry Baldman]

From the Beeb: Brexit: Gibraltar in talks with Scotland to stay in EU

And so begins the Scottish Empire.

[Max™]

Ok, calm down folks, I got a solution here, we'll trade you England, wankers and all, for Alabama and Mississippi (US folks: shhhhh), and what the hell, we'll let you keep the new Top Gear crew but we get the old one.

Deal?

[Starver]

Tory MP Says No.10 Should Have Had Brexit Plan.
Though note that this is just one MP claiming he was told this by 'a conservative leave mp'. We'll have to see the following weeks how much of a plan 'vote leave' has (or can come up with in that time frame, as it were).

It is rich for Leave to criticise Remain for having no contingency plan when Leave apparently had no primary plan.

Probably the Remain contingency plan was to let Leave deal with it, and just step away¹ whilst the Leave first plan was to sabotage their campaign with ridiculous claims about £350m towards the NHS, that they knew no half-intelligent voter would believe or trust, especially with the reality being pointed out to them.  One of these plans worked, it seems.

¹ Something something most political careers end in failure blah-de-blah...

[scriver]

I think it's kind of dismissive of cultures where honor killings are the norm to say that it's "just an excuse". It's horridly wrong, but it isn't just because they would have committed murder anyway

That is the thing. It ISN'T the Norm. they are bringing up a practice that just isn't done, is outright said not to do it, as simply an excuse.

It would be like saying when the KKK kill a homosexual that it is because it is the Christian Norm to do so.

Except in this case, all the Christians are part of the KKK.

What the hell? People are suffering en masse, coming to you for help, and you turn them away because it'd somewhat inconvenience you?

140 thousand people in one year is not an inconvenience. We have already accepted hundreds of thousands, probably even millions, if refugees. At which point can one put the foot down and say "No, sorry, this boat is full now. You have to seek aid somewhere else".

If you were fleeing a war-torn country, traveled thousands of miles and risked to life and limb to do so, would you want someone to graciously offer to help you rebuild your life when you finally arrive?

"No, I'd want them to tell me to fuck off and go ruin someone else's country."

Treat others as you'd want to be treated is the moral imperative.

These are people travelling through peaceful country after peaceful country to get to the ones with what they believe will have the greatest economic benefits. Seeking out the country which will provide the means for greatest future may be a very understandable and human behaviour, but the right to asylum was not meant to be abused in such a way.

And of course this is ignoring the point that the majority of the immigrants that make up the "refugee" crisis are not fleeing war and do not have legal grounds to receive asylum as defined by the UN. The narrative constantly hammered out do not match the reality of the situation.

I hate to use kids as an example, but, are you really going to tell a family with children who haven't done anything yet in their lives to earn the kind of enmity that is regularly handed out to their people...are you really going to say there's no moral imperative to help? Because that'd be cold-blooded.

The majority of the immigrants who come to Europe are not children or families with children. They are young, adult men.

Honestly being a Canadian makes this whole conversation so dang alien to me.

Maybe Canada just has magical refugee and immigrant calming powers.

It's the *magical* power of "being one of the countries hardest to immigrate to in the world".

Well, as an American, I can say that we're turning them away because they hate the west and want to kill us.

Hm.

Well, let's say we isolate the entire population of Arkansas because they're meth dealers.

Or let's say that we disregard 17.6 million British voters (and possibly the state of Alabama as well, for a closer-to-home comparison) because they're racist, ill-informed and want the world to burn. Does that sound fair?

PPE: damn, beaten to it by OW.

I would like hundreds of thousands of hyperconservative Americans with their fucked up culture and fucked up religions just as little as I'd like more immigrants of the same type from the middle east.

Come to think of it, a progressive, leftist American should have no trouble understanding why Europeans are so worried about middle eastern influx. Just imagine the most conservative Christians you can showing up in numbers/year greater than the fourth biggest city in your home state.

Tell that to Cologne.

Poorly-integrated immigrants are poorly-integrated, who'd a thunk it

As far as anyone can tell, 99% of refugees are decent people.

Poor integration is the natural result of the sheer numbers of immigrants.

And if 99% of people from the middle east were truly decent people then the middle eastern cultures would not look as they do today. Crossing a border into a European country does not magically give them new opinions, mindsets, and moralities.

Cologne* speaking here: You're full of shit. Most of the perpetrators of the New Year's attacks were North African men who were in Germany illegally, not as refugees. Please note that Syria is not a North African country, and Syrians actually are refugees in the true meaning** of the word.

*Well, Bonn, but that's basically just a suburb.
**As opposed to the 'brown people who haven't drowned in the Mediterranean' definition one sees so often.

That becomes irrelevant when media, activists, and idealists start using the word "refugee" to mean any immigrant currently hearing to Europe to apply for asylum, as has become practice since the "refugee crisis" came into bring. I have much less problem with syrians seeking asylum than with all the people who don't have any grounds for asylum - eg the people who make out the majority of the the "refugees".

 

To be perfectly honest I don't have all that much problem with refugees. My problem, as an American, is that the people in our government who want to let refugees in don't even want to enforce a simple background check. Not so much as a "have you taken part in terrorist summer camp?" question on a fucking checklist. Yeah, there are people suffering out there, but could we AT LEAST take SOME precautions against the assholes who want to use that to blow people up?

That isn't accurate. The US requires people to pass inspections by several different government agencies before they become eligible for migration, if I remember my facts right.

Source: John Oliver, that week tonight show.

Preedit: so tired of new posts showing up, screw it, I'm just posting this now.

[mainiac]

Ok, calm down folks, I got a solution here, we'll trade you England, wankers and all, for Alabama and Mississippi (US folks: shhhhh), and what the hell, we'll let you keep the new Top Gear crew but we get the old one.

Deal?

Ew no, I dont want those tossers.  We fought a war so we wouldn't need to give British toffs like that jobs.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

[Wolfhunter107]

Yeah, you have to wait a long time and jump through a bunch of different hoops to get in here. It's pretty bad.

[scriver]

From the Beeb: Brexit: Gibraltar in talks with Scotland to stay in EU

Could be that Gibraltar ends up in an opposite-Åland kind of thing (Finland is part of the EU but Åland isn't, because reasons), where Gibraltar is part of the EU but England isn't.

[Max™]

Ok, calm down folks, I got a solution here, we'll trade you England, wankers and all, for Alabama and Mississippi (US folks: shhhhh), and what the hell, we'll let you keep the new Top Gear crew but we get the old one.

Deal?

Ew no, I dont want those tossers.  We fought a war so we wouldn't need to give British toffs like that jobs.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

...but we get rid of Alabama AND Mississippi!

[Starver]

"It was reported in 2007 that more than one-fifth of solved crimes in London was committed by immigrants. Around a third of all solved, reported sex offences and a half of all solved, reported frauds in the capital were carried out by non-British citizens"

so is it pro or against? and yet this has little to do with the syrian immigrants (all research presented is severely dated)

May be relevent, from memory of the original programme broadcast.  (The bit about the Romanians.)

[Radio Controlled]

From the Beeb: Brexit: Gibraltar in talks with Scotland to stay in EU

And so begins the Scottish Empire.

When the people of the future ask who's to blame for the busily conquering bagpipe-wielding hordes from the West, they'll never believe us.

By the way, should I try to start adding the opening paragraphs when I link articles, or just make sure the title indicates what's it about? Won't copy the full article of course, though I dunno for sure what the rules on fair use are in that regard (then again, I doubt Toady really cares).

From Guardian: Cameron condemns xenophobic and racist abuse after Brexit vote
David Cameron has condemned “despicable” xenophobic abuse after the EU referendum as figures suggested a 57% increase in reported incidents.

The country would not stand for hate crime, the prime minister told MPs.

“In the past few days we have seen despicable graffiti daubed on a Polish community centre, we’ve seen verbal abuse hurled against individuals because they are members of ethnic minorities,” Cameron said.

“Let’s remember these people have come here and made a wonderful contribution to our country. We will not stand for hate crime or these kinds of attacks, they must be stamped out.”

Police believe there has been an increase in hate crimes and community tensions since last week’s referendum. Initial figures show an increase of 57% in reported incidents between Thursday and Sunday compared with the same days four weeks earlier, the National Police Chiefs’ Council said – 85 incidents were reported compared with 54 during the earlier period.
“It’s no coincidence this has come off the back of the EU vote,” said a police source.

The Beeb: Reality Check: Have Leave campaigners changed their minds?
On the fifth day after the referendum in which the UK voted to leave the European Union, the Reality Check team looks at some of the claims and promises made during the campaign by Leave campaigners who now appear to have modified their positions.

Also, that petition mentioned earlier (the one started by the Leave supporter https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215) has about 3,899,085 signatures right now. So even if only about 1 in 39 (2,6%) signatures are legit, that's enough to bring it up. But Parliament would have to pass a motion to invoke article 50 either way before it can go through (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/27/stop-brexit-mp-vote-referendum-members-parliament-act-europe and http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-27/can-britain-s-parliament-veto-brexit-your-questions-answered), so I dunno how much difference this would make.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

It’s not over yet. A law that passed last year to set up the EU referendum said nothing about the result being binding or having any legal force. “Sovereignty” – a much misunderstood word in the campaign – resides in Britain with the “Queen in parliament”, that is with MPs alone who can make or break laws and peers who can block them. Before Brexit can be triggered, parliament must repeal the 1972 European Communities Act by which it voted to take us into the European Union – and MPs have every right, and indeed a duty if they think it best for Britain, to vote to stay.

It is being said that the government can trigger Brexit under article 50 of the Lisbon treaty, merely by sending a note to Brussels. This is wrong. Article 50 says: “Any member state may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.” The UK’s most fundamental constitutional requirement is that there must first be the approval of its parliament.

Britain, absurdly, is the only significant country (other than Saudi Arabia) without a written constitution. We have what are termed “constitutional conventions”, along with a lot of history and traditions. Nothing in these precedents allots any place to the results of referendums or requires our sovereign parliament to take a blind bit of notice of them.

It was parliament that voted to enter the European Economic Community in 1972, and only three years later was a referendum held to settle the split in Harold Wilson’s Labour party over the value of membership. Had a narrow majority of the public voted out in 1975, Wilson would still have had to persuade parliament to vote accordingly – and it is far from certain that he would have succeeded.

Our democracy does not allow, much less require, decision-making by referendum. That role belongs to the representatives of the people and not to the people themselves. Democracy has never meant the tyranny of the simple majority, much less the tyranny of the mob (otherwise, we might still have capital punishment). Democracy entails an elected government, subject to certain checks and balances such as the common law and the courts, and an executive ultimately responsible to parliament, whose members are entitled to vote according to conscience and common sense.

Many countries, including Commonwealth nations – vouchsafed their constitutions by the UK – have provisions for change by referendums. But these provisions are carefully circumscribed and do not usually allow change by simple majority.

[RedKing]

Canada has the magical power of being cold and boring, much like Finland. Which is why thousands of Iraqis chose to go back to fucking Baghdad rather than stay in Finland.

Ok, calm down folks, I got a solution here, we'll trade you England, wankers and all, for Alabama and Mississippi (US folks: shhhhh), and what the hell, we'll let you keep the new Top Gear crew but we get the old one.

Deal?

Ew no, I dont want those tossers.  We fought a war so we wouldn't need to give British toffs like that jobs.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

...but we get rid of Alabama AND Mississippi!

Rednexit?