Brexit

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by islandgirl View Post
    Enjoy your sure and certain knowledge of being absolutely correct Macromia...
    That'd be difficult because I don't have "sure and certain knowledge of being absolutely correct", and have never claimed that I do.
    Besides, there is nothing about Brexit for me to "enjoy" if I am correct.

    Comment



      One person isn't a minority.
      One person is one person.
      You can only be a minority as part of a group and if the majority is (as in this case) everyone else, you're not a minority, you're just "you".

      Originally posted by Macromia View Post
      Even if Brexit was just used as the excuse of a mad-man, it is still why he attacked her, and therefore the two are linked.

      An act does not have to be reasonable, justified, or supported by others for it to have "something to do with" something.
      If the killer had claimed to support 'Remain', David Attenborough, Aldi, or whatever any killing would equally not represent the views, opinions or actions of whatever he claimed to be acting for - but if he took an action because he believed it was supporting them, then the action would have 'something to do with' them, even though they did not want, or support, the action.
      That position doesn't hold up to any kind of analysis.

      The point isn't that two things, someone's actions and what they claim motivated them have "something to do with" each other.
      They might, if there is any kind of meaningful connection.
      If someone were to kill Nigel Farage and blame his views on Brexit, there might be a connection.
      But if they did it and blamed it on men from mars it would have no connection with mars or men from it.

      Someone claiming to kill someone because of Brexit doesn't tell us anything at all about Brexit or people who believe in Brexit, it just gives us an insight into the killers mental state.
      But you're using the existance of killer who blames Brexit as an argument against Brexit or other people who believe in it.
      As is buzzard1994.

      And then...

      Jack Renshaw, who is the person in Mr 1994's link was a Nazi Paedophile (who may have been Pro Brexit, but it's hardly his main political view).
      He didn't plan to kill Rosie Cooper because of Brexit - she was his MP and he wanted kill someone then call the policewoman who was investigating his sex crime so she would come and be killed as well.
      Rosie Cooper was collateral damage.
      And, even if he had blamed Brexit, it wouldn't tell us anything about Brexit or any other person who happened to think leaving the EU is a good idea.

      Jo Cox's murderer was a white supremacist and a Nazi (who also happened to be pro-brexit I imagine).
      He didn't kill Jo Cox because of Brexit - she just happend to be his MP and he wanted to kill someone.
      And, even if he had blamed Brexit, it wouldn't tell us anything about Brexit or any other person who happened to think leaving the EU is a good idea.

      Lets extend the same concept.

      Charles Manson was a huge Beatles fan and believed that Helter Skelter was a coded message to kill people.
      That tells us something about Charles Manson and nothing at all about the Beatles or Helter Skelter.
      Implying that the Beatles were in any way responsible for Manson's murders just makes no sense.
      Nor does implying that liking the Beatles makes you in the slightest bit more like Charles Manson.
      When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
      Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

      Comment


        Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
        One person isn't a minority.
        One person is one person.
        You can only be a minority as part of a group and if the majority is (as in this case) everyone else, you're not a minority, you're just "you".
        A minority can be 50% of a group, however large, minus one person, or it can be just one person out of billions.
        One person will be a highly insignificant minority in all but the smallest of groups, but it is still a minority.


        Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
        The point isn't that two things, someone's actions and what they claim motivated them have "something to do with" each other.
        They might, if there is any kind of meaningful connection.
        If someone were to kill Nigel Farage and blame his views on Brexit, there might be a connection.
        But if they did it and blamed it on men from mars it would have no connection with mars or men from it.
        Obviously there has to be a tenable connection - but in the Jo Cox case I consider it unreasonable to doubt that there was a connection with Brexit when the killer's position and the things he apparently shouted are considered.

        Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
        Someone claiming to kill someone because of Brexit doesn't tell us anything at all about Brexit or people who believe in Brexit, it just gives us an insight into the killers mental state.
        I completely agree - but if they kill someone because of their views on Brexit, the killing clearly has 'something to do with' Brexit.

        Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
        But you're using the existance of killer who blames Brexit as an argument against Brexit or other people who believe in it.
        Precisely the opposite actually.
        I'm saying that it should be accepted that actions like this happened, and were (at least in part) linked to Brexit, but that these extreme actions SHOULD NOT be considered representative of the position of the majority on the side that the person(or people) involved claims to support.


        Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
        And, even if he had blamed Brexit, it wouldn't tell us anything about Brexit or any other person who happened to think leaving the EU is a good idea.
        Agreed.

        Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
        Jo Cox's murderer was a white supremacist and a Nazi (who also happened to be pro-brexit I imagine).
        He didn't kill Jo Cox because of Brexit - she just happend to be his MP and he wanted to kill someone.
        ...and he happened to choose an MP who supported Remain, and was apparently saying things like "This is for Britain" and "keep Britain independent" when he killed her. If his MP happened to be openly in support of leaving the EU, do you think they would have been chosen as someone to kill?

        Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
        And, even if he had blamed Brexit, it wouldn't tell us anything about Brexit or any other person who happened to think leaving the EU is a good idea.
        Agreed.

        Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
        Lets extend the same concept.

        Charles Manson was a huge Beatles fan and believed that Helter Skelter was a coded message to kill people.
        That tells us something about Charles Manson and nothing at all about the Beatles or Helter Skelter.
        Implying that the Beatles were in any way responsible for Manson's murders just makes no sense.
        Nor does implying that liking the Beatles makes you in the slightest bit more like Charles Manson.
        I agree that it tells us nothing about The Beatles or Helter Skelter. I agree that it doesn't make The Beatles responsible, and I agree that liking The Beatles doesn't make anyone more like Charles Manson - it only means that they share an apparently liking of a single band, and not necessarily even for the same reasons.
        I don't agree that Helter Skelter had nothing to do with Manson's killings in this scenario - if he thought that it contained coded messages telling him to kill (even though it didn't), the song is linked to his killing (even if only because of mental issues that made him hear 'messages' in the song that weren't actually there).



        Extreme views and actions from an insignificant minority within a group (whether a single person or not) shouldn't be used as arguments against that position - but there is nothing to be gained from trying to deny that there is any link at all - better to accept the link and also point out that it was a minority, or single person, and therefore irrelevant.

        Comment


          The UK’s so-called “powers that be” are betraying Brexit through a mix of social engineering and mock elections in order craft the false narrative that it’s actually the “people’s will” to remain in the EU.

          Comment


            This is funny:

            Comment


              I wrote along post that seems to have vanished - so lets try the condensed version.

              You are missing the point - that this is not something that people will only care about for a short time. I referred to threats of violence on both sides - you read it in the light of your own prejudices and ignore that. The only actual murder so far has been from someone citing Brexit and to deny that is to deny the facts. That is not an argument for or against either side - it is your prejudice that sees it that way..

              This is what MPs are receiving

              https://www.conservativehome.com/pla...e-victims.html

              https://www.scmp.com/news/world/euro...-routine-toxic

              https://www.theguardian.com/politics...rexit-tensions

              and they are frightened. This is not going to go away in days, the legacy will be with us for years whatever MPs decide to do.

              Comment


                But before getting sidetracked I had intended to post this

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZz9o-GNikg

                and https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-r...n-sir-humphrey

                Comment


                  Originally posted by buzzard1994 View Post
                  The only actual murder so far has been from someone citing Brexit and to deny that is to deny the facts.
                  Except that he never mentioned Brexit.
                  In fact he offered no defence at all.

                  Wikipedia (which is helpful in summarising a lot of data) "Mair had links to British and American far-right political groups including the National Front (NF), the United States-based neo-Nazi organization National Vanguard (the successor to the defunct National Alliance) and the English Defence League (EDL); he had attended far-right gatherings and purchased far-right publications,[1][23][24][25] to some of which he had sent letters and expressed support for South African apartheid.[26][27][1] In his home were found Nazi regalia, far-right books,[20][28][28] and information on the construction of bombs.[1][25] He had searched the internet for information about the British National Party (BNP), South African apartheid, the Ku Klux Klan, prominent Jewish people, matricide,[20][28] white supremacism/nationalism, Nazism/Nazi Party, SS/Waffen SS, Israel, mass shootings, serial killers, Frazier Glenn Miller Jr., William Hague, Ian Gow (another assassinated MP),[1] and Norwegian far-right terrorist Anders Behring Breivik (about whose case he collected newspaper clippings). He also owned Nazi iconography and books and films related to the Nazis.[29] A police official described Mair as a "loner in the truest sense of the word ... who never held down a job, never had a girlfriend [and] never [had] any friends".[1] The Guardian said that he "appears to have fantasised about killing a 'collaborator' for more than 17 years, drawing inspiration from" David Copeland."

                  The day before the murder he went to clinic for help with deppression and had an appointment set up, so his mental state at the time is questionable.

                  At his trial witnesses couldn't agree what he shouted as he killed Jo Cox, citing variously "​​​​​​​"This is for Britain", "keep Britain independent", and "Put Britain first". The middle one could be construed as a Brexit slogan, but is probably a reference to the far right "replacement" theory, where the white UK nationals are subsumed by immigrants who impose their culture on the white population. The other two are simply fairly common UK nazi slogans.

                  Most nazis would support brexit, but it's not a particularly significant element of their beliefs.
                  I think making Jo Cox's killing anything to do with brexit is a huge stretch.
                  There's an argument that the issue is so devisive that it's having a detremental effect on our cultural and social values and behaviours, but the murder of Jo Cox was the work of a Nazi who acted alone.
                  If people are triggered by that event to send MPs death threats, and MPs are, natually, more affected by them than previously they might have been, that's possibly an effect of Brexit and how it's been handled.
                  When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
                  Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

                  Comment


                    In a triple-header of revelations today, The Slog assembles the evidence to condemn the Prime Minister as an anti-democratic, unconstitutional and enthusiastic supporter of Superstate hegemony and coordinated European defence. We trace her suspicious rise to power, the defence agreements signed during 2018 that nobody knew about, and how the media have been cowed into…

                    Comment



                      I read the first article.
                      " Unelected Prime Minister Theresa May triggered Article 50 shortly before 12:30pm on March 29 2017…..more than seven months after her Coronation. No credible explanation has ever been offered as a reason for such a delay. We can be certain, however, that it gave the European Commission in Brussels some much needed breathing space in which to liaise geopolitically, and sort out its stonewalling strategy."

                      The reason for the delay is that a number of lawyers began a legal action a few days after the referendum to prevent the government triggering article 50 without a parliamentary vote and the government felt it couldn't issue a notification while the court case progressed and didn't want to risk a vote because they thought they might lose. That's hardly a secret, it was front page news for months. Once the supreme court announced that parliament had to vote (remember the daily mail Traitors headlines), they did and the notification was sent three weeks later.

                      " Theresa May showed no desire to walk away and leave the EU without a deal. Observers were puzzled as to why this was, given a No Deal scenario would hit the EU far harder than it would Britain."

                      No deal would hit the EU harder than the UK (Britain isn't in the EU, the UK is) only if you factor out scale. Simple example, the government estimate that a no deal Brexit would cost the UK 1/2 a million jobs and the EU a million. But the UK workforce is 32.6 million and the EU has about 195m people employed (UK excluded). So 1.5% of the UK work force lose their jobs and about .5% of the EU workforce do.

                      When you apply that to pretty much every prediction for no deal, the numbers are bigger for the EU but the actual effect is much smaller.
                      When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
                      Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
                        Except that he never mentioned Brexit.

                        At his trial witnesses couldn't agree what he shouted as he killed Jo Cox, citing variously ""This is for Britain", "keep Britain independent", and "Put Britain first". The middle one could be construed as a Brexit slogan, but is probably a reference to the far right "replacement" theory, where the white UK nationals are subsumed by immigrants who impose their culture on the white population. The other two are simply fairly common UK nazi slogans..
                        Various misleading comments here -

                        Two days after the murder, Mair appeared at Westminster magistrates' court, where suspects in terrorism cases are brought. Asked to state his name, he said: “Death to traitors, freedom for Britain.”

                        Cox wrote in a local newspaper column : "I believe that the patriotic choice is to vote for Britain to remain inside the EU where we are stronger, safer and better off than we would be on our own.” Mair printed out the Cox column and filed it in a ring-binder that police found at his house along with a press cutting about Anders Breivik, the Norwegian far-right terrorist who killed 77 people in 2011.

                        You say that trial witnesses "couldnt agree" but in fact he made several comments when he was killing her - he walked away then went back. He shot her several times and stabbed her 15 times. He probably made all the reported comments. The judge mentioned that Mair made several comments in his sentencing remarks - but I cant find a court transcript to confirm what the witnesses said.

                        Although it was reported by the press that he sought help with depression the police say CCTV did not confirm this. His lawyers did not seek to claim he was mentally ill. The Guardian reported
                        "He underwent an examination by a psychiatrist, who could find no evidence that he was not responsible for his actions as a consequence of poor mental health" This was possibly after the initial hearing at Westminsters magistrates court.

                        While Mair undoubtably had a history of mental illness no evidence was presented to show that he was ill at the time of the murder. .



                        Comment


                          Fair and reasonable points.
                          None of which indicates that Jo Cox' assassination anything to do with Brexit, though.
                          When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
                          Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

                          Comment


                            Absolutely agree JP.
                            So as you can see I am back from Europe. My Italian is good enough to have a few chats about Brexit - people fully understand why we want to leave though they hate their own government more than they hate the EU! Saw a menu offering a Brexit pizza - did not dare go in and ask what was on it!
                            Unshackled by the chains of idle vanity, A modest manatee, that's me

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by jpkeates View Post

                              No deal would hit the EU harder than the UK (Britain isn't in the EU, the UK is) only if you factor out scale. Simple example, the government estimate that a no deal Brexit would cost the UK 1/2 a million jobs and the EU a million. But the UK workforce is 32.6 million and the EU has about 195m people employed (UK excluded). So 1.5% of the UK work force lose their jobs and about .5% of the EU workforce do.
                              I know that I'm being picky but Britain is in the EU and so is the UK.

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by Kape65 View Post
                                I know that I'm being picky but Britain is in the EU and so is the UK.
                                Always have a soft spot for Picky.

                                I made the distinction for a reason, though.
                                While Great Britain is part of the UK, Great Britain is in the UK while the UK is.
                                But if certain people have their way, the relationship with the EU and Northern Ireland and the EU and Great Britain would be different.
                                Hard border in the Irish Sea and all that...

                                And when we enter into international treaties we are the UK, not Great Britain.
                                When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
                                Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

                                Comment

                                Latest Activity

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X