caveman
Member
- Location
- East Sussex.
Instead of using a well known, fake news trick, could you please quote the whole of Old McDonalds sentence and paragraph, instead of your edited cut?
Boris is doing well
- Thread starter bobk
- Start date
Instead of using a well known, fake news trick, could you please quote the whole of Old McDonalds sentence and paragraph, instead of your edited cut?
Alan Miller: the star stockpicker who switched to ETFs
Now better known as Gina’s husband, the CIO of SCM campaigns for fund transparency
www.ft.com
Is this public knowledge? Allan Miller, husband of Gina!!!
Last edited:
- Location
- Scottish Highlands
Just click on the little arrow next to his name and it takes you to his quote. No need to duplicate everything.
- Location
- South Wales UK
- Location
- Limousin, France
Doesn't this just mean standards ?
It's not no tariffs?
Old McDonald
Member
- Location
- Harray, Orkney
What are not “your” words? I have not disagreed that you (mis)quoted from fullfacts, but the article is an opinion, not the EU official documents which I copied direct, and gave the source. I add bolding where I think it appropriate to draw attention to a specific part. I accept that the opinion is given by a very learned person, but as we have so very recently seen in the courts in both Scotland and England the highest and second highest courts may very well disagree with each others’ opinion. I am sure there are other learned persons who disagree with the fullfact opinion. The opinion given does not, for example, take into account some of the information in the official documentation such as that I quoted from the Solemn Declaration on European Union at the European Council meeting in June 1983:
“The Heads of State or Government, on the basis of an awareness of a common destiny and the wish to affirm the European identity, confirm their commitment to progress towards an ever closer union among the peoples and Member States of the European Community.”
I could also have bolded the opening phrase but did not consider it necessary at the time. Read the sentence very carefully and think about what it says.
For other references showing that member states are involved see the other extracts and sources I posted. Your claim that everyone can read does not necessarily mean that those reading take in what is written. For instance, you are still claiming that ever closer union applies only to the peoples and not states or governments despite the extracts I posted at #141, which included the Solemn Declaration.
I did not rewrite Cameron’s statement, I copied it direct from Hansard, and gave the source when doing so.
The Founding Treaty does indeed refrain from adding “the governments” in the Preamble, but throughout the rest of the Treaty (ie the Articles, or the important parts) it continually refers to Member States and never “the peoples”. How do Member States function other than through their governments? In the example above and others previously quoted there are references to states and governments. I would like to know how it is possible to have ever closer union of the peoples of various member states without involving those member states. As @Henarar keeps telling us, nobody has ever asked him or any other of “the peoples” so how have the peoples been involved in decision making as opposed to their governments? As shown in my extracts the EU does not “always” use the term “the peoples”.
I did not make any argument about the amount of the UK’s contribution to the EU. You said “What we pay into the EU is peanuts compared to what we get out of it,we actually give N.Ireland more per year!” By “we” I presume you mean the UK, which results in the weird situation that you are suggesting “we” give to ourselves since NI is part of the UK. Or do you think NI should not be treated as part of the UK and accounted for separately? How about Wales, Scotland and England? How much does the UK “give” them? I merely asked for your acceptance that in recent times the net amount, after rebates and EU expenditure in the UK was a little under £9bn. adding that I considered that somewhat more than peanuts, so disagreed with you about calling the amount peanuts. You now appear to accept the figure is correct, and consider it money well spent. You are entitled to think that way. Some will agree with you and some will not.
I agree I write long responses and give numerous examples to illustrate points that show the assertions of others to be either right or wrong. In your case I have given many examples, and in copying the actual official documentation I show why your statements are wrong. Nothing I posted at #112 can possibly be condemned as “utter rubbish” nor can the fullfact article be considered as to have “completely demolishes everything you have written in your posts.” “Everything I have written” is mainly direct copy which cannot be denied its authenticity, and where appropriate its authority.
I have an enormous amount of spare time at present and for some time past, except today, when I had a full day of ancillary business commitments. I have not been able to do any outside work for about 4 months and am under medical instruction not to do so for a while yet due to recuperating from what I am told was a major heart operation. I am presently allowed to lift, carry or push/pull a maximum of 5kgs. Even beyond 4 months ago I rarely did more than about 30 hours per week outside and have had a lot of spare time for a few years. I am way past my “use by” date and on a small property that I have organised to give me the minimum amount of manual labour. I employ other people to do whatever I cannot do myself. Many other posters on here employ staff, so I am not alone.
Old McDonald
Member
- Location
- Harray, Orkney
I know what the Treaty of Rome says, I have posted part of the Preamble and referenced it often enough. That Treaty was only one of what was in force when the UK joined.
See my response to Jendan immediately above, for my reasons why the now EU was, is and ever more shall be an ever closer union of European states which are members of it, and not just the peoples without any involvement of the member states.
I pose you the same question “How can the peoples (of all the member states) be part of an ever closer union without the involvement and agreement/acquiescence of the member states?” The only way would be for the EU to enforce it without any reference to the member states, and the EU is not going to attempt that, even if it had the capability to do so, which of course it does not, so it needs the agreement of the member states to endorse that ever closer union of their peoples.
Danllan
Member
- Location
- Sir Gar / Carms
Nice one, but you're as well banging your head upon a wall. Fullfact… not all that is claimed
What do you do for fun, other than TFF?
- Location
- Scottish Highlands
Is that your post which cites a 1983 declaration? Not exactly applicable in the context of the original referendum, which was the basis for your earlier post that I was challenging, is it?
- Location
- Bay of Plenty NZ
I lived 40 years in the UK and visit most years, not what I would class as a short encounter.
- Location
- Bay of Plenty NZ
Isn't Boris going to stop live exports?
14th October 2019
"Brexit will bring all sorts of commercial, economic and also humanitarian objectives. It is very relevant to the concerns of this country that we will be able, for the first time, to ban the exports of live animals, which have offended people in this country for so long. I wonder whether the right hon. Member for Islington North has even considered that. Those are among the things we can get done once we get Brexit done, but even before we get Brexit done, let us get on—"
Last edited:
How long do you spend in other countries and how many people do you speak to in the UK each year ?
Old McDonald
Member
- Location
- Harray, Orkney
The answer to your first question is Yes. Read on.............
I do like the way you so carefully select just enough of a post by someone to make it read differently to the full response. You are quite proficient at it and fool many posters, but not all. That is what you did with your copying of the Treaty of Rome. You cut that off immediately before the interesting part where there are many, many references to “Member States” and none to “the peoples”.
Then you make a claim about your own post which is downright untrue. You were not challenging a post by me which was based on the context of the original referendum. You were challenging a part of my post addressed to Raider 112 which stated that we were part of the ever closer union of European states. We could only be part of that from when we joined. We were not members in 1957 so could not be part of that Treaty, but even if we refer only to the 1957 Treaty there are those numerous Articles to which I have just referred that use the expression “Member States”, so even had I been referring only to that Treaty and its signatories I would still be correct in referring to them as an “ever closer union of European states”.
Jendan posted recently that everyone can read. I remember thinking at the time “Aye, but gey few read things properly”. You have picked up on my reference to the Solemn Declaration in 1983. You failed to take in that that reference was given to jendan as one example of fullfact.org ignoring EU documentation in the opinion piece about ever closer union. Nothing to do with either the Founding Treaty or the UK joining the now EU, but purely with reference to the opinion in fullfact.
What you singularly missed, or chose not to take into consideration in your desire to attempt to discredit me, is my response to jendan in respect of the 1957 Treaty and that is the part you should have been concentrating upon if you are concerned only about that Treaty:
The Founding Treaty does indeed refrain from adding “the governments” in the Preamble, but throughout the rest of the Treaty (ie the Articles, or the important parts) it continually refers to Member States and never “the peoples”. How do Member States function other than through their governments? In the example above and others previously quoted there are references to states and governments. I would like to know how it is possible to have ever closer union of the peoples of various member states without involving those member states.
I do note that you also choose to ignore questions put to you.
Hindsight
Member
- Location
- Lincolnshire
The European Union is understood to be demanding that Britain sign up to all future state aid, environmental and social regulations as part of “level playing field” provisions
Just copied from the midday edition of The Times under talks stutter.
Just copied from the midday edition of The Times under talks stutter.
Old McDonald
Member
- Location
- Harray, Orkney
Nice one, but you're as well banging your head upon a wall. Fullfact… not all that is claimed
Thanks. When I bang my head against a wall I wear a crash helmet. I feel no pain and I can keep it up for a very long time. Eventually the wall usually moves away. My posts are written for the forum not individuals (although this one is specifically for you) and if I can do anything to help sway the switherers towards a Leave frame of mind I will be happy. For a wee bit more than 60 years I have been trying to convince anybody I come across that being a member of the now EU is not a good idea for the UK.
I know I was still at school then, but I was opposed to the notion of a FrancoGerman organisation, which is the way I saw it - with a few hangers on. Later, I became a bit ambivalent to the organisation, but still opposed to UK membership. I often used to wonder if I was indeed the only one (as jendan said I thought I was) who had read the Treaty of Rome and its ever closer union of the member states. Actually, I read an unofficial transcript, but never doubted its accuracy. Subsequent Treaties, regulations, declarations and statements, etc. have not diminished my opinion that it is not for the UK.
I thought you would have seen through fullfact too. I find it useful for a lot of things, and then sometimes do a little more research, but I find it a good starting point. The example I gave to jendan about the opinion piece ignoring the many times that government or member state is used, is an indication of the subtle Remain bias which I think the site has.
As for your question, the answer for the last few months is idle about. I am not recovering as quickly as relatives and other people I know who have had lesser work needing done during a heart operation, but I was warned this was likely to be the case and I had to take things very slowly. This means my muscles continue to reduce from lack of use rather than rebuild quickly.
Prior to the problems which hospitalised me I tried to fit in as much weight training as possible, not bodybuilding, just weight training. It is something I have done since my late teens. Apparently the size of my chest muscles means that they put a bigger strain on the stapled chest opening than that of a skinnymalink and I was given longer restrictions than the standard advice. They translated and printed out an English language version of the discharge advice, and I was impressed to see the first paragraph included the instruction “Avoid excessive consumption of alcohol and drugs”. Very sensible attitude.
I have always enjoyed fruit and vegetable gardening, but have done none this year. Other than that I would normally do as much fishing as I could reasonably fit in – my stretch of river containing only crayfish that are worthy of capture and eating due to an invasion of the American Mosquito Fish which eats the eggs of the natives. I am trying to retire and intend to move to Ilha do Pico in the Azores and spend the next 25 years sitting in some comfortable place and trying to catch the odd meal; also do a bit more pottering about (to quote Pam Ayres) in a garden where it is never too dry (can be too wet) and very rarely below about 14ºC or above 25.
- Location
- Northumberland
I have always known that the UK government gives NI about 9 Billion per year,and have never disputed that.This is for just 1.8 million population.The figure was given for comparison purposes; i e,about the same as we pay into the EU.I think you are tying yourself up in knots over what you consider to be "ever closer union".By the way,there is nothing wrong with having lots of spare time.Its what we are all aiming for,so as to do other things we want to do.
Last edited:
- Location
- Bay of Plenty NZ
Varies depending on where I am, sometimes a day and others a few weeks, speak to several people in the UK on a regular basis, why do you ask?
Old McDonald
Member
- Location
- Harray, Orkney
What are you going on about with this idea of “giving” money to NI? You originally, in referring to the net contribution to the EU, said “What we pay into the EU is peanuts compared to what we get out of it,we actually give N.Ireland more per year!
You obviously know that NI is part of the UK, and I have already tried to steer you in the correct direction by pointing out that the UK cannot “give” to itself. If you are referring to Public Spending in NI then the amount of the UK’s overall spending, by country and by region, in 2017/18 is shown in https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN04033#fullreport It is a briefing, so an extremely short paper. The full report is only 7 pages.
The amount of expenditure in NI, which is higher per head of population than any other of the four countries, is considerably more than £9bn., the amount which you say you have always known and never disputed. £11,190 x almost 1.9m is a tad more than £9bn., not that it has anything to do with ever closer union of the EU, despite your attempt at making a comparison between public expenditure in a part of the UK and its contribution to the EU.
I fail to see any connection between what the UK spends in its own country and a contribution to the EU. One is purely for the benefit of its own citizens and the other is for the benefit of citizens of other countries. Remember the amount of £9bn. is after all rebates and the EU expenditure in the UK.
It is not what I consider to be ever closer union that matters, it is what the EU considers to be ever closer union. I am very clear on what I have posted – extracts from EU Treaties and other official documents. They spell out in clear language and in some detail that the EU policy is, and always has been, one of ever closer union of its member states.
The amount of spare time I have was raised by you in a manner suggesting there is something wrong with having lots of it. There is. If I was fit I would have very little.
Scribus
Member
- Location
- Central Atlantic
Leaving state aid and social considerations aside I have of late come to the conclusion that the EU is utterly clueless when it comes to the environment. It has adopted and is following a narrow agenda that just happens to suit big business under the guise of environmental concern rather than any sensible plan to reduce pollution and live in greater harmony with the planet.
H200GT
Member
- Location
- NORTH WALES
Well he has his deal, we haven’t seen the detail but the EU “red line” backstop has been removed if we are to believe news reports.
Assuming it gets approved by EU, Brexiteer MP’s have a huge decision to make. Back the deal and deliver some kind of brexit, or twist in the hope of a better or no deal which some would prefer, but at the risk of potentially no brexit at all.
Interesting few days ahead
Assuming it gets approved by EU, Brexiteer MP’s have a huge decision to make. Back the deal and deliver some kind of brexit, or twist in the hope of a better or no deal which some would prefer, but at the risk of potentially no brexit at all.
Interesting few days ahead
- Tags
- establishment platform urea utv vra