[cite]Posted By: Barn Door Lisbie[/cite]Whether your're for or against it, surely we must all agree thet we are entitled to the vote that we were promissed?
Ah Yes but as Gordon said the other day on BBC Breakfast it isnt the EU Constitution therefore no vote is needed, despite the leaked notes from Angela Merkel saying it was in all but name.....
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck......
Why is Gordon the only leader that feels he has to lie to us, most other european leaders have already admitted that it's the same in all but name.
If he belives that it is such a good thing, lets see the evidence and decide for ourselves.
We have lots of opt outs, so it is not the same thing.
That leaves the smaller parties. Green are eco Nazis seeking to control and curtail the freedom of movement of decent ordinary people by propagating the myth that climate change is solely down to the actions of man. The ice age etc cannot be blamed on man. Again no time today to expound further.
Every peer-reviewed scientific paper on the issue would beg to differ with you, Len, but you keep going your own way - don't worry about future generations, eh?
'UK Independence Party are just the BNP with brains.' this would be the same party that is signed up to the anti facist treaty amongst all parties except for the BNP. The same party how put forward a British asian for a recent by election. hmm ok.
[quote][cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]While my natural learning is to the left - ask my tailor ; - ) - I've never been a fan of Labour. The Tories, I fear, will reveal their true colours of cut, cut, cut to help the rich as soon as they are elected and while I'm closer to the liberals on some issues I can't take them seriously.
So pt me down as a committed don't know who will defo vote for someone but not sure who.
UK Independence Party are just the BNP with brains.[/quote]
[quote][cite]Posted By: Rothko[/cite]Labour, and people who think there isn't a stuble difference is living in a tabloid cuckoo world[/quote]
How isn't there a subtle difference between the 2 parties? There is minimal difference between the 2 parties. Policices on the environment, crime, immigration etc are practically the same. For example jack straw saying yesterday calling for review on homeowner prtoecting their home with reasonable force. This was presented by tories 5 years ago but was swiftly rejected by Straw so why the u turn now? Party politics in my opinion is a farce as those at the top arent bothered about how policy will affect the people, they are just bothered about saying what the electorate would like to think and so they stay in government. An absolute farce.
Not sure who id vote for , Brown no, same old labour spin but just a bit more subtle, cameron no jsust Blair in a different colour tie. Lib dem joke party and parties such as UKIP, BNP and Green really are just two one dimentianal to support as a party.
UKIP's always struck me as the kind of party founded by some henpecked husbands in a garden shed somewhere in Surrey, where they can plot a future liberated from Europe and not bother what "the wife" thinks, but then it all comes crashing down when it meets reality.
Shame, really, because while I don't agree with them, it's a point of view that need to be represented properly.
[cite]Posted By: Barn Door Lisbie[/cite]Whether your're for or against it, surely we must all agree thet we are entitled to the vote that we were promissed?
Ah Yes but as Gordon said the other day on BBC Breakfast it isnt the EU Constitution therefore no vote is needed, despite the leaked notes from Angela Merkel saying it was in all but name.....
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck......
Why is Gordon the only leader that feels he has to lie to us, most other european leaders have already admitted that it's the same in all but name.
If he belives that it is such a good thing, lets see the evidence and decide for ourselves.
We have lots of opt outs, so it is not the same thing.
I personally don't believe that but if that is the case, as I said above, lets see that facts and we can make up our own mind.
[quote][cite]Posted By: Thommo[/cite]The main thing is that the UK doesn't receive as much money back through the CAP as other member states, although this is slowly balancing following both BSE and foot and mouth. Britain still gets its rebate, although this has indeed been made smaller (now more in line with that of France and Italy) this was one of Blairs concessions to the EU.
In exchange for our contribution to the EU, we get many benefits. Access to the single market alone generates extra wealth for European citizens. For example, in 2002 this was equivalent to nearly £300 per person, far less than we pay individually via the governments contributions to the EU (Britain’s contribution to the EU amounts to approximately £175 per head of its population, per year). Take into account the funding that comes back in this takes the original 175 down to about £50 per head (a quid a week) per citizen. For a £300 cost saving benefit per person, I think thats a good payoff!
'UKIP's always struck me as the kind of party founded by some henpecked husbands in a garden shed somewhere in Surrey, where they can plot a future liberated from Europe and not bother what "the wife" thinks, but then it all comes crashing down when it meets reality.'
UKIP have never been given a chance nor the Green's, Respect etc.. in power who knows a minor party in power could do wonders compared to what the tories and the labour party have done when they have been power and that has been a lot of destruction.
[quote][cite]Posted By: LenGlover[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]While my natural learning is to the left - ask my tailor ; - ) - I've never been a fan of Labour. The Tories, I fear, will reveal their true colours of cut, cut, cut to help the rich as soon as they are elected and while I'm closer to the liberals on some issues I can't take them seriously.
So pt me down as a committed don't know who will defo vote for someone but not sure who.
UK Independence Party are just the BNP with brains.[/quote]
Apologies for the bad quoting but the link won't work if I quote properly.
Section 2.3 is the relevant one.[/quote]
Don't want a good debate about a possible election to get into a race row but there are SOME UKIP members and officials with some very dodgy pasts and connections. For example
"Former UKIP leader Sked, now a Conservative member, has previously claimed "the UKIP is even less liberal than the BNP." He added: "Certainly, there is a symbiosis between elements of the parties, and Nick Griffin, the BNP leader, has spoken on the BBC of an informal pact between his party and elements of the UKIP leadership."
"Certain observers fear that a deal has already been struck whereby the UKIP concentrates on the south of England and the BNP on the north – exactly what Mr Griffin implied."
[cite]Posted By: pete_tong1[/cite]
UKIP have never been given a chance nor the Green's, Respect etc.. in power who knows a minor party in power could do wonders compared to what the tories and the labour party have done when they have been power and that has been a lot of destruction.
I doubt they'd do wonders, but a change of system could lead to these parties having a voice in coalition government, which would at least be a bit more representative. UKIP's always struck me as a bit of a shambles, mind, and so's Respect.
That leaves the smaller parties. Green are eco Nazis seeking to control and curtail the freedom of movement of decent ordinary people by propagating the myth that climate change is solely down to the actions of man. The ice age etc cannot be blamed on man. Again no time today to expound further.[/quote]
Every peer-reviewed scientific paper on the issue would beg to differ with you, Len, but you keep going your own way - don't worry about future generations, eh?[/quote]
It's a long article but man is only responsible for 6% of carbon emissions.
In other words, as I said, climate change is predominantly a natural phenomenon.
[cite]Posted By: Barn Door Lisbie[/cite]Whether your're for or against it, surely we must all agree thet we are entitled to the vote that we were promissed?
Ah Yes but as Gordon said the other day on BBC Breakfast it isnt the EU Constitution therefore no vote is needed, despite the leaked notes from Angela Merkel saying it was in all but name.....
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck......
Why is Gordon the only leader that feels he has to lie to us, most other european leaders have already admitted that it's the same in all but name.
If he belives that it is such a good thing, lets see the evidence and decide for ourselves.
We have lots of opt outs, so it is not the same thing.
If thats the case then why are they so desperate to not allow the general population to see ALL the facts.....
as somebody living in the south of england who is married, with a home and kids there's absolutley no way i could vote for gordon brown...mind you, the alternatives are hardly a better option so it'll be a random cross on the day for anyone but the labour candidate...and i always vote...
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]While my natural learning is to the left - ask my tailor ; - ) - I've never been a fan of Labour. The Tories, I fear, will reveal their true colours of cut, cut, cut to help the rich as soon as they are elected and while I'm closer to the liberals on some issues I can't take them seriously.
So pt me down as a committed don't know who will defo vote for someone but not sure who.
UK Independence Party are just the BNP with brains.
Apologies for the bad quoting but the link won't work if I quote properly.
Section 2.3 is the relevant one.
Don't want a good debate about a possible election to get into a race row but there are SOME UKIP members and officials with some very dodgy pasts and connections. For example
"Former UKIP leader Sked, now a Conservative member, has previously claimed "the UKIP is even less liberal than the BNP." He added: "Certainly, there is a symbiosis between elements of the parties, and Nick Griffin, the BNP leader, has spoken on the BBC of an informal pact between his party and elements of the UKIP leadership."
"Certain observers fear that a deal has already been struck whereby the UKIP concentrates on the south of England and the BNP on the north – exactly what Mr Griffin implied."
European Commissioners and Labour cabinet ministers used to be Marxists, another form of repugnant extremism some would say, yet it has not disqualified them from holding office.
Alan Sked founded UKIP but left acrimoniously and has rubbished it ever since. Some say he is jealous of the progress it made following his departure.
I'm not claiming UKIP is perfect but the racist smear is dated and unfounded. Party members with former links to the BNP, National Front etc have been thrown out because the party wants to be inclusive.
[cite]Posted By: InspectorSands[/cite]Er, Len, have you read that to the end? That's Bible-bashing, not science.
And it quotes that well-known journal for boffins in white coats... the Sunday Express.
Darwin was a Marxist and that proves global warming is a myth.
Come on Len there are much better and real scientific bits of research than that nonsense.
I sense that because the article was published in a journal called Christian Order there is an automatic prejudice against it!
The bibliography and various references are from "proper scientists" as well as articles in newspapers.
I have not got the time to debate this more fully today.
I supplied that link as it seems to put the alternative viewpoint to the prevailing orthodoxy quite well in one article.
I'm not asking anybody to agree with me but just to consider that there might be vested interests in lying the blame for climate change at the door of man.
Having read the article I am still looking for anything resembling science that suggests that global warming is a load of rubbish. There are a few stats and lots of soundbites but nothing that really seems like evidence of the theory put forward. Much the same for the evolution stuff at the top. I could sum it up in six words:
[cite]Posted By: InspectorSands[/cite]Er, Len, have you read that to the end? That's Bible-bashing, not science.
And it quotes that well-known journal for boffins in white coats... the Sunday Express.
Darwin was a Marxist and that proves global warming is a myth.
Come on Len there are much better and real scientific bits of research than that nonsense.
I sense that because the article was published in a journal called Christian Order there is an automatic prejudice against it!
The bibliography and various references are from "proper scientists" as well as articles in newspapers.
I have not got the time to debate this more fully today.
I supplied that link as it seems to put the alternative viewpoint to the prevailing orthodoxy quite well in one article.
I'm not asking anybody to agree with me but just to consider that there might be vested interests in lying the blame for climate change at the door of man.
There are, I agree, vested interests on both sides of the global warming debate but the article you refer to ends with the following quote. Forget Brown, Cameron or UKIP. These are the people a really fear taking over the world.
"We must, therefore, confront this reality: that what we face is a fight to the death with a satanic global behemoth which would crush us except for the guaranteed spiritual weapons and means of grace at our disposal - prayer, penance and the daily Rosary. In this mounting confrontation - between the Gospel and the anti-gospel; the one true Church and the one world anti-church; Christ and Anti-Christ - the only response, as Archbishop Barragan concluded, is "an authentic universal ethic" to supplant the phony humanistic "values" of the genocidal goddess worshipped by the eco-death dealers: an ethic whose object must be nothing less than God Himself and the historical fact of the Incarnation of God, Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. "
Can't stand any of them to be honest. UKIP is run by Daily Mail readers with too much time on their hands, Labour and the Tories are pretty much indistinguishable and both dishonest and corrupt as hell, BNP are scum. That leaves me with Lib Dems or Green so I guess I'll pick one on the day.
As for the rallying against the 'man as the cause for global warming' argument that seems to be gathering apace recently - in terms of actions, why does it even matter whether we're causing global warming or not? Say you could prove tomorrow that it's mostly not our fault then what would you suggest we do next? Scrap renewable fuel programs? Stop recycling? Encourage industry to stop spending money reducing pollutants? Relax targets on pollution reduction? Surely not?
Filling my house with shit might not make it fall down but I still wouldn't really want to live in it.
Arent the Bruges group just a neo-liberal think tank (reportedly non partisan haha) headed up by such mighty figures as Norm 'exchange rate mechanism' Lamont.
Im not pro european or anti european to any large extent, I just cant stand the press and its friends constantly running down the EU with untruths and exaggerations.
The Tories seem to be 'still' ripping themselves apart over Europe, Labour at least was pro-active on Europe, and the Lib Dems are the ones fully leading the call for an EU referendum (not on constitution, but on the EU).
UKIP still are to all intents and porpoises! an irrelevance due to the voting system them supportedly oppose. They are badly represented and supported within both Brussels and Strasbourg and refuse to take briefings from key regional players (RDA's Regional business councils, Regional assemblys, the local government association etc etc) are they a serious party or just there to throw a spanner in the works?
An interesting argument re global warming is that the studies that are conducted are "sponsored" by parties with vested interest to show results one way or another. It could therefore be argued that these independent scientists are not exactly unbiased as results that contradict the stance of the sponsors would result in withdrawal of future funding.........
Not saying I agree or have any proof of this, just that its an interesting concept.
Dan - i love this comment you made 'Plus. Why does he do that horrible asthmatic inhalation of breath every time he pauses....' my friends and i were having a similar discussion, & we had all noticed this annoying inhalation - i think its a deliberate ploy to avert my attention - (if so, it has worked)
[cite]Posted By: addickfandan[/cite]Dan - i love this comment you made 'Plus. Why does he do that horrible asthmatic inhalation of breath every time he pauses....' my friends and i were having a similar discussion, & we had all noticed this annoying inhalation - i think its a deliberate ploy to avert my attention - (if so, it has worked)
Comments
2 out 10, Ketman must be better ;o)
Every peer-reviewed scientific paper on the issue would beg to differ with you, Len, but you keep going your own way - don't worry about future generations, eh?
So pt me down as a committed don't know who will defo vote for someone but not sure who.
UK Independence Party are just the BNP with brains.[/quote]
http://www.ukip.org/ukip/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=27&Itemid=39
Apologies for the bad quoting but the link won't work if I quote properly.
Section 2.3 is the relevant one.
How isn't there a subtle difference between the 2 parties? There is minimal difference between the 2 parties. Policices on the environment, crime, immigration etc are practically the same. For example jack straw saying yesterday calling for review on homeowner prtoecting their home with reasonable force. This was presented by tories 5 years ago but was swiftly rejected by Straw so why the u turn now?
Party politics in my opinion is a farce as those at the top arent bothered about how policy will affect the people, they are just bothered about saying what the electorate would like to think and so they stay in government. An absolute farce.
Not sure who id vote for , Brown no, same old labour spin but just a bit more subtle, cameron no jsust Blair in a different colour tie. Lib dem joke party and parties such as UKIP, BNP and Green really are just two one dimentianal to support as a party.
Shame, really, because while I don't agree with them, it's a point of view that need to be represented properly.
I personally don't believe that but if that is the case, as I said above, lets see that facts and we can make up our own mind.
In exchange for our contribution to the EU, we get many benefits. Access to the single market alone generates extra wealth for European citizens. For example, in 2002 this was equivalent to nearly £300 per person, far less than we pay individually via the governments contributions to the EU (Britain’s contribution to the EU amounts to approximately £175 per head of its population, per year). Take into account the funding that comes back in this takes the original 175 down to about £50 per head (a quid a week) per citizen. For a £300 cost saving benefit per person, I think thats a good payoff!
.[/quote]
Figures eh! From The Bruges Group
http://www.ukip.org/ukip/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=174&Itemid=57
UKIP have never been given a chance nor the Green's, Respect etc.. in power who knows a minor party in power could do wonders compared to what the tories and the labour party have done when they have been power and that has been a lot of destruction.
So pt me down as a committed don't know who will defo vote for someone but not sure who.
UK Independence Party are just the BNP with brains.[/quote]
[url]http://www.ukip.org/ukip/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=27&Itemid=39[/url]
Apologies for the bad quoting but the link won't work if I quote properly.
Section 2.3 is the relevant one.[/quote]
Don't want a good debate about a possible election to get into a race row but there are SOME UKIP members and officials with some very dodgy pasts and connections. For example
"Former UKIP leader Sked, now a Conservative member, has previously claimed "the UKIP is even less liberal than the BNP." He added: "Certainly, there is a symbiosis between elements of the parties, and Nick Griffin, the BNP leader, has spoken on the BBC of an informal pact between his party and elements of the UKIP leadership."
"Certain observers fear that a deal has already been struck whereby the UKIP concentrates on the south of England and the BNP on the north – exactly what Mr Griffin implied."
http://www.searchlightmagazine.com/index.php?link=template&story=100
An old article (2001) I admit
I doubt they'd do wonders, but a change of system could lead to these parties having a voice in coalition government, which would at least be a bit more representative. UKIP's always struck me as a bit of a shambles, mind, and so's Respect.
That leaves the smaller parties. Green are eco Nazis seeking to control and curtail the freedom of movement of decent ordinary people by propagating the myth that climate change is solely down to the actions of man. The ice age etc cannot be blamed on man. Again no time today to expound further.[/quote]
Every peer-reviewed scientific paper on the issue would beg to differ with you, Len, but you keep going your own way - don't worry about future generations, eh?[/quote]
It's a long article but man is only responsible for 6% of carbon emissions.
In other words, as I said, climate change is predominantly a natural phenomenon.
http://www.christianorder.com/features/features_2006/features_oct06.html
However with taxes to be levied and money to be made politicians and the donors to their parties would have you think different.
LOL Rothers see you tomorrow !
And it quotes that well-known journal for boffins in white coats... the Sunday Express.
If thats the case then why are they so desperate to not allow the general population to see ALL the facts.....
FACTS.
European Commissioners and Labour cabinet ministers used to be Marxists, another form of repugnant extremism some would say, yet it has not disqualified them from holding office.
Alan Sked founded UKIP but left acrimoniously and has rubbished it ever since. Some say he is jealous of the progress it made following his departure.
I'm not claiming UKIP is perfect but the racist smear is dated and unfounded. Party members with former links to the BNP, National Front etc have been thrown out because the party wants to be inclusive.
And it quotes that well-known journal for boffins in white coats... the Sunday Express.[/quote]
Darwin was a Marxist and that proves global warming is a myth.
Come on Len there are much better and real scientific bits of research than that nonsense.
I sense that because the article was published in a journal called Christian Order there is an automatic prejudice against it!
The bibliography and various references are from "proper scientists" as well as articles in newspapers.
I have not got the time to debate this more fully today.
I supplied that link as it seems to put the alternative viewpoint to the prevailing orthodoxy quite well in one article.
I'm not asking anybody to agree with me but just to consider that there might be vested interests in lying the blame for climate change at the door of man.
Lots of words, no real content.
There are, I agree, vested interests on both sides of the global warming debate but the article you refer to ends with the following quote. Forget Brown, Cameron or UKIP. These are the people a really fear taking over the world.
"We must, therefore, confront this reality: that what we face is a fight to the death with a satanic global behemoth which would crush us except for the guaranteed spiritual weapons and means of grace at our disposal - prayer, penance and the daily Rosary. In this mounting confrontation - between the Gospel and the anti-gospel; the one true Church and the one world anti-church; Christ and Anti-Christ - the only response, as Archbishop Barragan concluded, is "an authentic universal ethic" to supplant the phony humanistic "values" of the genocidal goddess worshipped by the eco-death dealers: an ethic whose object must be nothing less than God Himself and the historical fact of the Incarnation of God, Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. "
As for the rallying against the 'man as the cause for global warming' argument that seems to be gathering apace recently - in terms of actions, why does it even matter whether we're causing global warming or not? Say you could prove tomorrow that it's mostly not our fault then what would you suggest we do next? Scrap renewable fuel programs? Stop recycling? Encourage industry to stop spending money reducing pollutants? Relax targets on pollution reduction? Surely not?
Filling my house with shit might not make it fall down but I still wouldn't really want to live in it.
Im not pro european or anti european to any large extent, I just cant stand the press and its friends constantly running down the EU with untruths and exaggerations.
The Tories seem to be 'still' ripping themselves apart over Europe, Labour at least was pro-active on Europe, and the Lib Dems are the ones fully leading the call for an EU referendum (not on constitution, but on the EU).
UKIP still are to all intents and porpoises! an irrelevance due to the voting system them supportedly oppose. They are badly represented and supported within both Brussels and Strasbourg and refuse to take briefings from key regional players (RDA's Regional business councils, Regional assemblys, the local government association etc etc) are they a serious party or just there to throw a spanner in the works?
Not saying I agree or have any proof of this, just that its an interesting concept.
Now! Where's Satan? He's missing an Advocate ;-)
Here you go!! ;-)