PeterDGardner

PeterDGardner

68p

340 comments posted · 11 followers · following 0

5 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - What should our post-B... · 2 replies · +1 points

The right policy is very simple. The problem is that politicians, especially those like Mrs May, seek something complex, for she loves detail.
1) The sustenance of British culture may cause an economic price. So be it. To say otherwise is to be like the man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
2) On average immigrants DO cost UK more than the average Brit.
3) Immigration may be reduced by:
a) Encouraging employers to seek British employees and contractors first - this used to be normal in UK and most other countries do so now.
b) Rejecting all immigrants who will not respect, assimilate and contribute to British culture.
c) Accepting only immigrants who will make a net economic contribution to UK.

6 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Brexit. Compare and co... · 1 reply · +1 points

You are talking nonsense. You claim to have been in almost every part of UK for long periods within the last twelve months. Clearly you are lying.

6 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Brexit. Compare and co... · 1 reply · +1 points

Splendid example of drawing false analogies to reach a conclusion you want. I am well aware of what went on in Northern Ireland. It was not a war between two branches of the Christian church. However, if it were then the logical conclusion would be to expect a similar war between Muslims on one side and Christians and Jews on the other.
You sneer at 'differences ..like which bit of cloth to salute'. you have the logic the wrong way round. the flag is the result of a set of beliefs and aims. These are important. If they were not people would not fight about them. I guess you are quite happy with ISIS flags paraded through the streets of London, perhaps even join in the happy marchers. Do you also sneer and laugh when these people murder young girls at a dance, or drive vehicles into innocent pedestrians? And do you merely sneer at terrorists shouting Allahu Akbar as they murder people for no other reason than their not being muslim? And you perpetuate the lie that Islam is a religion of peace.
No doubt you sneer at the EU flag and are blind to the significance of it being required by law to fly it over UK's public buildings. It is to show who's boss, you idiot.
A no go area is one where the atmosphere is enough to make one think twice about going there. It is not only one where one is excluded by force.
You are a complacent idiot, most useful to those who want to do UK down.

6 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Brexit. Compare and co... · 0 replies · +1 points

Still handwringing, June.

6 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Brexit. Compare and co... · 4 replies · +1 points

I have been in areas of Birmingham, Wolverhampton and Leeds where I have been made to feel most unwelcome by the behaviour of Muslim inhabitants, glaring at me, following me, rude and discourteous shop staff. They are no-go areas as far as I am concerned. I do not map my movements by postcodes nor record my every movement for the benefit of proving my point should I be challenged. But I do consciously avoid such areas. I should not feel that in my own country. It is not the same as being uncomfortable in an area of high crime. I am uncomfortable because in these circumstances the people show by their dress they are not part of my society and that stems from their religion which you, perhaps, do not realise is quite hostile to all others, especially Christianity and Judaism. Against criminality I may have protection of the law and redress under the law. There is no law offering protection from the hostility of Islam nor any redress.

6 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Brexit. Compare and co... · 17 replies · +1 points

The debate on immigration has been the most divisive and one would think that since it has continued for such a long time all aspects would have been aired. But, perhaps blinded by the emotions involved, there is one massive latent new factor that will emerge during Mrs May's transition that has received no attention. The proportion of Muslims in several parts of the EU is set to increase sharply, largely due to the recent and continuing surge in migration from Africa and the Middle East. Currently most of them are not EU citizens, but they very soon will be. The EU's regime of freedom of movement will give them a legal right to move and reside anywhere in the EU, including in UK if Mrs May's shift is accepted.
To some extent it is true that the motivation of most EU immigration has been to seek work, because even a low wage in UK is significantly higher than wages in their own countries. But when that also brings a markedly alien culture that continues to demonstrate a refusal to integrate, the issue will no longer be economic but cultural. Will they have a right to vote in UK elections? Of course.
UK already has Muslim ghettos and no-go areas. Remainers have argued that it is not attributable to immigration from the EU. Partially true but it certainly will be greatly exacerbated if Mrs May allows EU citizens and their families rights of residence during the transition. Islam will be exported to UK from the EU on the back of EU citizenship - an eventuality completely unforeseen by the architects and supporters of freedom of movement, who assume a high degree of cultural homogeneity that will no longer exist.

6 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Ashley Fox: Canada ill... · 0 replies · +1 points

Ashley Fox makes Mrs May's proposal sound very good from UK's perspective but some unrealistic assumptions are implied. The first is that Like Canada, there is nothing on the UK side that the EU does not already regard as belonging to the EU. For example fishing rights. Fishing sinks below the horizon in the scale of UK concerns because its fishing industry is very small. But we should remember that it was taking UK's fish that was one of the main drivers of the then EEC accepting UK's membership. Uk's fishing industry declined to insignificance because of EU membership. Getting it back implies a major potential growth area for UK - the resources are renewable and just as big as they were in the 1970s - and a major loss for some EU member states. The EU accumulates the negatives in order to improve its negotiating position and ensure 'solidarity. So it takes only one member state to say no for the EU to say no. We should remember too that EU ownership of the UK's EEZ in respect of fishing is legally correct. On exit the law changes and they switch from EU to UK ownership. That new legal regime of UNCLOS also imposes considerable responsibilities on UK for the first time, because it did not exist when UK joined the EEC. If the Government doesn't hoist this in and do something about its new legal obligations, the EU will have a legitimate claim to do it itself as UK defaults. The law will be on the side of the EU because of UK's failure.
Next is the assumption that Mrs May's government is competent to decide which sectors to cherry pick. unlike Canada, UK's industry has already been shaped very much by EU membership. Free of that it may well grow in unexpected directions. Now is not the time to lock parts of it into EU regulation. Add to that the thrust of the continuing alignment argument emanates from Remainers. They have let go of parts of their claim in order to appease Brexiteers. Who knows which is right before we allow industry the freedom to develop in its own way. Who in government has an adequate background to even make one decision with confidence? Certainly not Mrs May. And government direction of industry to this level of detail is the practice only of single party states inclined to extreme socialism and communism. there is a reason for that. We in the West are by now supposed to know that governments always get it wrong when they try to pick winners.

7 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Nicky Morgan: As Turke... · 1 reply · +1 points

You are merely repeating old stuff. Most of it was wrong first time round. It is still wrong now. I have given you the facts many times. you still don't understand the difference between being able to make, or change laws and having them decided by others who have the legal right to overrule our own government. You are clearly impervious to reason and truth. In short, you are a lost cause.

7 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Nicky Morgan: As Turke... · 1 reply · +1 points

This a classic bit of Remoaner misinformation aka lies: “Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market” — Daniel Hannan, MEP
Truth, always painful for Remoaners but we have to do this to them, poor darlings,for their own good:
Daniel Hannan has made it clear, on numerous occasions, that his position is to retain access to the Single Market, without actually being members. I recall this interview specifically well when he mentioned this, and clarified almost immediately afterwards that by place he didn’t mean “membership”, but rather that we would still have a role to play by engaging in economic activity. Admittedly, the word “place” here was probably badly used, but it’s amazing how easy it is to take things out of context to present a point that wasn’t actually being made.

“Only a madman would actually leave the market” — Owen Paterson MP, Vote Leave backer

Ah, yet another out-of-context quote. Notice the word “market” not being prefixed with “single” there. I’ve seen some occasions online where this quote has been deliberately modified to include the word single without the telling square brackets to make clear it’s a clarifier — which is disingenuous misinformation. In the interview, he was specifically talking about “leaving the market” as in rejecting all trade with members of the EU. Nobody — at all — was suggesting this be the case. The full interview can be found here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhb-DLqelN8 and after the quote mentioned, he specifically says we will “carry on trading with the market” — not carry on trading AS MEMBERS of the market — and that we will come to a “trading arrangement”. This is only seconds after the quote is mentioned.
https://medium.com/@jamesforward/a-rebuttal-to-op...

7 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Nicky Morgan: As Turke... · 0 replies · +1 points

Just thought I would let you know I agree with you on this if little else.