UK forum members, BREXIT?

[Corporate666]

One sentence as if that is ok. You and your country are in denial, the USA related death by firearms for countries is top 10 in the world, you are in the same league as Panama, Urugay and the likes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
You think that is overreacting? The response to 911 was overreacting by a huge scale, only 3500 deaths and the whole country has changed to intolerate, frightened and paranoid people, unfortunately.
Do the math and see how many people are killed by your own people each year and compare that to terrorist death related incidents, now what should have higher priority hmmmmm

What am I in denial about, exactly?

You're making the "more people die from guns than terrorism" retort, except I never made the counter-claim, so I am not sure how your post relates to anything I said?

As for the absolute # of people killed by guns in the USA - yes, we have more gun deaths than Europe.  That's because guns are legal here and widely available.  But that is only a small part of the reason.  We also have a very mixed society, much more so than many other countries.  You're also counting suicides, which is disingenuous when making a point about gun violence (unless the claim is that we should be afraid of ourselves).

[MK14]

What am I in denial about, exactly?

You're making the "more people die from guns than terrorism" retort, except I never made the counter-claim, so I am not sure how your post relates to anything I said?

As for the absolute # of people killed by guns in the USA - yes, we have more gun deaths than Europe.  That's because guns are legal here and widely available.  But that is only a small part of the reason.  We also have a very mixed society, much more so than many other countries.  You're also counting suicides, which is disingenuous when making a point about gun violence (unless the claim is that we should be afraid of ourselves).

It is reasonable to include the suicides, because in a relatively gun free country. There is a degree of difficulty, work and time delay involved, if one was to try and perform it in e.g. The UK.
Sometimes (but rarely, fortunately) a relatively normal person has a lot of bad things happen, and they begin to feel suicidal. In the UK, the difficulty (and time delay), in sorting that out, hopefully contributes, to people in general not committing suicide.

But in the US, it is considered way too easy, for an upset individual, having a really bad day, to just grab their gun, point it at their head, and press the trigger.

But I agree, that in strict violence and crime terms, including those figures messes up the balance. I.e. Is somewhat misleading.

[Corporate666]

No, what I wanted to say was: if everyone wants autonomy by themselves and no democratic cooperation the result is less stability. It is true that bigger entities are no guarantees for peace, nor do I think unions or large countries have value in itself. But I believe that cooperation in a democratic way on larger geographic scales are necessary to solve many problems humanity is facing. EU is a way for the European countries to cooperate peacefully, and everyone in the union profits from it.

I think your words sound correct and logical from an intellectual standpoint, but I think the reality tells a different story.  It's difficult to categorize the things that make a group of people want to form their own country.  Race, geography, culture, economics, social structure, history and many other things factor into it.  When groups are forced to be together when they don't want to be - that is what leads to wars.  I certainly don't think there have been any conflicts which would otherwise have occurred in Europe that didn't because of the EU, and I can think of a lot of bad-blood and ill-will that has been created due to the EU.  Hopefully it will never precipitate into war, but time will tell.

It is obvious that all those who are in favor of the EU also think it will last more than a few years, is it not?

Your definition of "the test of time" is "more than a few years"?  Do you think the EU will still exist in 500 years?  I don't think so.  But 500 years would be a pretty short lifespan for most countries and most empires.  Frankly, I don't think anyone involved in the EU gives any thought to how long it will last, nor should they.  Doing something on the basis of "it will still be around a long time from now" isn't a good reason.  It was politically expedient (and in some ways economically expedient) for the EU to be created, which is why it was.  It is also showing cracks which, IMO, will ultimately (and soon) prove fatal.

There are also numerous small individual nations that didn't last. And there are heterogeneous empires that did, like China. The US and EU are not the same but the US have been a union far longer and it's a union of a different kind. From what I know the US isn't that homogeneous either.

Yes, there are individual nations that didn't last.  But there are some that did.  There are no empires that lasted even close to as long as many individual nations have lasted.  And I don't think China is a good example of an empire that prevented war breaking out between member states.  The history of China is littered with conflict - and it continues today (Tibet, Taiwan, Korea, etc).

[Corporate666]

Sorry but I have to strongly disagree with that. I'm not religious myself but I don't see any mainstream religion in itself as evil.

I don't see how you could see any of the top few religions as anything OTHER than evil?

Evil is defined as immoral and malevolent.  The only way (for example) christianity, judaism or islam could possibly be considered anything other than evil is if one uses the "get out of jail free" card of claiming the instructions given in these religions' texts are metaphorical, or outdated and not intended to be taken literally anymore.

But that is a giant erroneous leap of logic, considering that the texts themselves are very clear about what one is to do in certain situations, and those things commanded are, by definition, evil.

[Corporate666]

It was the same in the middle ages here, if you were an atheist you would have been tortured to death. Christian mobs burned down the library of Alexandria, burned mathematical books and other heathen devilish nonsense. They also liked to burn people, witches and scientist like poor Galileo. And the church didn't admit the Galileo sentence was a mistake until 1992.

Europe went through The Enlightenment.  That was a result of social, cultural and technological advancement of the time.  That phenomenon has not occurred throughout the muslim world, despite the fruits of enlightenment (higher standard of living, more rapid technical advancement, and many more) being clearly obvious and available to all the world. 

So I don't think there's any certainty that immersion in European culture will lead to softening of radical views.  In fact, there's apparently a substantial amount of data that suggests second generations are more radical then first generations.  One thing about the USA is that while we celebrate our diversity, people pretty rapidly assimilate into American culture.  The same isn't true of Europe - certainly not to the extent that it happens in the US.

[Corporate666]

No, only refugees with a valid reason for asylum are allowed to stay, everyone else are deported. No country in the world consider poverty a valid reason for asylum. They have valid reasons of asylum because of the Iraq war and the civil wars that followed.

Apologies to forum members if I am spam-replying to this thread (haven't had time last few days to catch up), but apis, isn't the problem with the refugees that they claim to be from war-torn countries or the victims of repression?  And they throw away their documents, making it impossible to know where they are actually from - hence making it impossible to legally deport them, no?

That is the problem, IMO.  If you look at the number of refugees from Syria or Iraq, it is a very small minority of the number of refugees.  And Europe is paying a high price by being too nice and too liberal/socialist on their rules that makes them forced to take these people.  AFAIK, arab countries have only accepted a tiny minority of these people, and most countries have refused to take any at all. 

[Corporate666]

And for my last post of the day in this thread

So now there is a military coup in Turkey.

Turkey.

 

Now, Turkey is not an EU member, but they are about as close as it gets without being one.  They are an OECD member, a member of the Council of Europe, they are part of a limited trade union with the EU, and are a candidate for full EU membership - and they are pretty close to formalizing full membership in the Shcengen zone, allowing free travel for Turkish citizens to other schengen countries.   

And the issues that are currently holding up their full membership aren't based on a dysfunctional political system - but rather things like recognition of the Armenian genocide, the fact that the Greeks generally dislike them (mostly over Cyprus).  But IMO Turkey is (was?) well on their way to full EU membership, and I am sure political correctness would probably ensure they would not be required to conform to western standards of democracy like, oh, NOT imprisoning people for criticizing the government, or making blasphemy illegal.

I can't think of many other indicators of how far off course the EU is than the fact that Britain is leaving, and one of their up-and-coming prospects is in the midst of a military coup. 

[bitslice]

The solution is to crush ISIS as soon as possible! 

Not really,
even if you could, the number of people they kill is insignificant compared to the number of people who die in car crashes.

If you need to identify the real enemy, here's a clue:

You opened your doors to wolves, you invited butchers into your house, for decades, under multiculturalism. And political correctness.

Mariusz Blaszczak, commenting on the Nice attack:

"...a result of years of multi-cultural policies and political correctness.
We don’t have such problems. We don’t have districts where law other than Polish law reigns. We don’t have no-go zones for police”

 

Jo Cox was really a grotesque example of all that is wrong with politics. A wonderful young women, either completely out of touch with her electorate or intentionally not representing them.

Actually it's too easy to blame muslims for everything, what else can we expect from a 3rd world medieval religion - but she was the real enemy within, the 5th column undermining our political system - those that hold up banners welcoming immigrants, but then they are nowhere to be seen when the killing starts. Those that celebrate equality but turn a blind eye when the raping starts, or unbelievably lie about it when raped themselves. The "progressive" Left repeatedly cover up basic facts about the problem with a whitewash of censorship via character assassination.

But crime rates are not higher in Malmö than other cities, sex related or otherwise. It's only xenophobes and racists that would say the city is ruined because they want a racially/ethnically pure country.

 

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/09/18/interview-retired-swedish-police-chief-says-malmo-crime-skyrocketing-due-uncontrolled-immigration-no-go-zones/

"amount of crimes committed [in Malmo] has increased out of all proportion"

Just out of interest, comparing Malmo with the equally diverse city of London
http://www.numbeo.com/crime/compare_cities.jsp?country1=Sweden&country2=United+Kingdom&city1=Malmo&city2=London
and Malmo comes off worst (and to me, all of London is a no go zone)

Or bizarrely compare it against Mogadishu in Somalia,
http://www.numbeo.com/crime/compare_cities.jsp?country1=Sweden&country2=Somalia&city1=Malmo&city2=Mogadishu

Not only are the Somalians less worried about crime, but you are only slightly less likely to get mugged at night in Malmo. 


The "progressive" Left not only creates the domestic terrorist problem in the first place (invite millions to come, shove them into ghettos and then fail to create jobs, "but we are your friends, please vote for us"), but then prevent any action to tackle the root problem by handing that community a free get-out-of-jail card ("It's nothing to do with Islam") 

That line is growing kinda stale now, don't you think?

Of course it is a multifaceted problem, poverty, inbreeding, education and a homophobic, misogynistic, medieval culture all tie up with a totalitarian regressive religion to create a basic compatibility with Western democracy.
It's now time to finally ignore the "progressive" Left screaming "racist" at everyone, accept that this problem does obviously lie within islam, and stop pretending we have any moral reason left to pander to that culture.

Poland is safe, Hungary is safe  - and the sole reason they are safe is that they have preserved a religious and ethnically homogeneous society, and have not been bullied into accepting the EU's failed Marxist social experiment in enforced diversity.

[zapta]

Anyway, cats are awesome.

Finally something I can agree with!

Great! Just use common sense which and how many of them you let invade your home. They can drag your entire household down and danger the neighborhood.  ;-)

[Simon]

Anyway, cats are awesome.

Finally something I can agree with!

Great! Just use common sense which and how many of them you let invade your home. They can drag your entire household down and danger the neighborhood.  ;-)

I have two kittens, and that's my quota used up

[Simon]

Sorry but I have to strongly disagree with that. I'm not religious myself but I don't see any mainstream religion in itself as evil.

I don't see how you could see any of the top few religions as anything OTHER than evil?

Evil is defined as immoral and malevolent.  The only way (for example) christianity, judaism or islam could possibly be considered anything other than evil is if one uses the "get out of jail free" card of claiming the instructions given in these religions' texts are metaphorical, or outdated and not intended to be taken literally anymore.

But that is a giant erroneous leap of logic, considering that the texts themselves are very clear about what one is to do in certain situations, and those things commanded are, by definition, evil.

Just look at some of the weired shit the yanks come up with. I hate religion, it is controlling and and does no one any good but for those incapable of controlling their lives for themselves although I'm sure there is an alternative.

[jancumps]

Jo Cox was really a grotesque example of all that is wrong with politics. A wonderful young women, either completely out of touch with her electorate or intentionally not representing them.

Actually it's too easy to blame muslims for everything, what else can we expect from a 3rd world medieval religion - but she was the real enemy within, the 5th column undermining our political system - those that hold up banners welcoming immigrants, but then they are nowhere to be seen when the killing starts. Those that celebrate equality but turn a blind eye when the raping starts, or unbelievably lie about it when raped themselves. The "progressive" Left repeatedly cover up basic facts about the problem with a whitewash of censorship via character assassination.

[Simon]

but there was no excuse for her killing. We don't have much of a left wing movement in our government. Any openess to immigration is probably from the right that like cheap labour in their businesses.

[Tepe]

Referendums no, but general elections are conceivable way to make it happen. That is to be avoided if at all possible, hence... see my previous comments.

It isn't so easy to get large shifts in the not first-past-the-post voting systems, i.e., all the other EU countries. So I don't think that is likely to happen at all.

[MK14]

but there was no excuse for her killing. We don't have much of a left wing movement in our government. Any openess to immigration is probably from the right that like cheap labour in their businesses.

There is a right and wrong way of doing things.

{Right} He (the killer) should/could of persuaded people in his constituency to vote for someone else, by creating sensible arguments. He also could have discussed his issue(s) with her, at that very political surgery meeting place.
He could have even put himself forward as the next candidate for their MP.

{Wrong} It is up to the hundreds of thousands (I'm not sure how many there are there) to decide who gets voted in to be their MP. Not up to one mad/bad killer, to decide for everyone else.

The most I would have readily accepted, was for him to create a large protest banner, explaining his concerns, and for him to display it somewhere.
What he actually did was outrageous.

Maybe he was too ill (mentally), and that was the overall issue.

[Simon]

I think he was a combination of ill and radialized, it's not just Muslims that become radialized and commit acts of extremism. I really have heard a lot of tosh from people who can't be bothered to be open minded.

[rollatorwieltje]

And for my last post of the day in this thread

So now there is a military coup in Turkey.

Turkey.

 

Now, Turkey is not an EU member, but they are about as close as it gets without being one.  They are an OECD member, a member of the Council of Europe, they are part of a limited trade union with the EU, and are a candidate for full EU membership - and they are pretty close to formalizing full membership in the Shcengen zone, allowing free travel for Turkish citizens to other schengen countries.   

And the issues that are currently holding up their full membership aren't based on a dysfunctional political system - but rather things like recognition of the Armenian genocide, the fact that the Greeks generally dislike them (mostly over Cyprus).  But IMO Turkey is (was?) well on their way to full EU membership, and I am sure political correctness would probably ensure they would not be required to conform to western standards of democracy like, oh, NOT imprisoning people for criticizing the government, or making blasphemy illegal.

I can't think of many other indicators of how far off course the EU is than the fact that Britain is leaving, and one of their up-and-coming prospects is in the midst of a military coup. 

Turkey was underway to become an EU member until Erdogan came into power. After that, not so much.

Essentially Turkey has now voted a TEXIT. The military gave the people the option today to vote for "Ataturk" or Erdogan. The public has voted, the public has chosen Erdoghan (by not supporting the military). That's pretty much the end of modern Turkey. Back to the middle ages for them. Pretty sure the Turkish government will now remove all power from the military, which was the only sparkle of hope for a secular modern Turkey.

Quite sad, I have many colleagues in Turkey. Seems again a case of the modern educated youth being oppressed by their uneducated backward family.

[jancumps]

I don't think that an army that does coups is a sparkle of hope for anything.

[Marco]

We don't have much of a left wing movement in our government. Any openess to immigration is probably from the right that like cheap labour in their businesses.

Historically it was the right which encouraged guest labors and the worker parties which opposed it. It's seems to have shifted now, now neither of the UK's relevant parties seems to represent people who want no further mass immigration (ie. the majority, today and historically).

Certainly none of the existing parties were willing to make a true stand in that regard in my country, just screw around in the margins and not touch the holy EU freedom of movement and the even holier Geneva convention on refugees and Human Rights treaties (which will be binned at some point when the whole of Africa moves north).

[Simon]

Well as I said before. Freedom of movement as intended when it was introduced is not what it has become.

[rollatorwieltje]

I don't think that an army that does coups is a sparkle of hope for anything.

It helps to get rid of undemocratic dictators. Erdogan is actively trying to silence the opposition and has control over all the media in the country. Limiting free speech is undermining democracy. The military realized there was a threat to the country and acted on it. They did it several times already, it's not new. It's sketchy, but so is removing democratic mechanisms in a republic.

Note, I'm not saying everything Ataturk did was great, but declaring Turkey a secular republic pulled it from the middle ages into a modern country. Realize this happened in the 1920s.

[apis]

Jo Cox was really a grotesque example of all that is wrong with politics. A wonderful young women, either completely out of touch with her electorate or intentionally not representing them.

Actually it's too easy to blame muslims for everything, what else can we expect from a 3rd world medieval religion - but she was the real enemy within, the 5th column undermining our political system - those that hold up banners welcoming immigrants, but then they are nowhere to be seen when the killing starts. Those that celebrate equality but turn a blind eye when the raping starts, or unbelievably lie about it when raped themselves. The "progressive" Left repeatedly cover up basic facts about the problem with a whitewash of censorship via character assassination.

No. The problem are the fascists, racists and islamists.

She was murdered by a right wing idiot, but he could just as well have been a member of ISIS. That is their goal: to tear up europe from the inside. Why do you think putin are sponsoring the radical right in Europe? Hint: KGB used to call them useful idiots.

But crime rates are not higher in Malmö than other cities, sex related or otherwise. It's only xenophobes and racists that would say the city is ruined because they want a racially/ethnically pure country.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/09/18/interview-retired-swedish-police-chief-says-malmo-crime-skyrocketing-due-uncontrolled-immigration-no-go-zones/

"amount of crimes committed [in Malmo] has increased out of all proportion"

Just out of interest, comparing Malmo with the equally diverse city of London
http://www.numbeo.com/crime/compare_cities.jsp?country1=Sweden&country2=United+Kingdom&city1=Malmo&city2=London
and Malmo comes off worst (and to me, all of London is a no go zone)

Or bizarrely compare it against Mogadishu in Somalia,
http://www.numbeo.com/crime/compare_cities.jsp?country1=Sweden&country2=Somalia&city1=Malmo&city2=Mogadishu

Not only are the Somalians less worried about crime, but you are only slightly less likely to get mugged at night in Malmo. 

You need to focus more on source criticism.

What is 'numbeo'? Do you honestly believe crime rate in malmö is higher than in mogadishu or london.   Breitbart .

The fact that some people lie like this, about what it's like in malmö and other places, scare me just as much as ISIS. It is such things that trigger people like the insane guy (terrorist?) who murdered Jo Cox.

I live near malmö, I visit malmö every week. I read the local newspapers. I read the statistics. Sweden have the best freedom of information act in the world; government can't hide statistics here. Crime rate in malmö is not higher than other cities in sweden. And in fact, criminal violence in sweden have been declining steadily since the nineties.

I could dig up the real figures for you, but the really big question is: what does this have to do with Brexit? 

[apis]

We don't have much of a left wing movement in our government. Any openess to immigration is probably from the right that like cheap labour in their businesses.

Historically it was the right which encouraged guest labors and the worker parties which opposed it. It's seems to have shifted now, now neither of the UK's relevant parties seems to represent people who want no further mass immigration (ie. the majority, today and historically).

The right wants free movement of labor in the entire world and no social welfare! Many countries allow "worker immigration" or whatever the English term is.

Europe's problem recently have been how to deal with refugees from the Iraq war and its consequences. No one asked for it, it's just that there are millions of people fleeing from afghanistan, iraq, syria and somalia now. Most of them are staying in refugee camps in the neighboring countries but there have been a steady trickle of refugees who have found their way into europe and seek asylum here. The left (and most of the right) in Europe are simply trying to deal with the problems the right in the US/UK have created by invading Iraq.

[zapta]

The right wants free movement of labor in the entire world ...

You just made this up.

Europe's problem recently have been how to deal with refugees from the Iraq war and its consequences. No one asked for it, it's just that there are millions of people fleeing from afghanistan, iraq, syria and somalia now.

Europe problem recently is that it's naive, weak, and doesn't protects it's borders.

No one asked for it,

Of course you asked for it, by your policies that invite an invasion.

but there have been a steady trickle of refugees who have found their way into europe ..

s/trickle/flood/

s/found their way/forced their way/.

It's your naïveté and policies that will destroy your culture and playing the choice-less victim will get you nowhere.

That's my 2c. Good luck. ;-)

[dannyf]

what's happening in europe is a genocide.

You will understand that in 2030, or 2050. But it will be too late.