Brexit - (AKA...should they stay or should they go now?)

[TLDR20]

Immigrants, naturally, tend to group out of necessity at first. Look at NY's Little Italy and Boston's old Irish neighborhoods.

I think the question here though is less of racism and more of a rational fear of terrorism and the gradual dissolution of national character.

It doesn't strike me that Muslims in particular are all that keen on assimilation. And unfortunately, the intolerance and violence between their various sects and toward Jews, Christians, Westerners and other infidels seems to migrate in along with the more moderate True Believers. Is it racism to fear Jihadist radicals? It may be unfair, but given events of the last decades completely understandable and in many cases justified.

Haven't the English suffered more at the hands of Irish/Catholic Terrorists than Muslim terrorists?

 

[Gunz]

Haven't the English suffered more at the hands of Irish/Catholic Terrorists than Muslim terrorists?

Nobody can deny that. But why invite even more potential trouble?

I honestly don't blame people for not wanting a huge influx of immigrants, not just for the possible dangers, but for the strain it puts on economies.

 

[policemedic]

Honestly, immigration wouldn't be a topic in the US, England, Europe, or wherever if immigrants assimilated into the existing culture. You can maintain your culture without overthrowing the status quo. Whether a community or a country, you start making enemies and stoking fears when you remain an outsider. You've decided your old home sucked so bad you had to leave, so you conduct what amounts to a peaceful invasion of another land....and you're pissed when someone calls you out?

This is why it would never enter my head to refer to myself as a Canadian-American. I'm proud of where I come from--Montréal is awesome--but I'm an American citizen now, and that's what matters.

 

[Red Flag 1]

Haven't the English suffered more at the hands of Irish/Catholic Terrorists than Muslim terrorists?

It is all about religion, isn't it. Even the Muslim Terrorists are going to war for their religion, as they see it. Religions divide people, they do not unite them, even though they hold the same God so sacred. If you step back, and look at religious interactions over the ages, it is an ugly, bloody picture. The Spanish went after people from their own religion during the Spanish Inquisition. From a practical, life and death viewpoint, The migration to the west is bringing God knows what with it. To fear immigration into the UK is understandable.

My $.02.

 

[Ex3]

I wonder how she voted?

I guessed correctly. smh

 

[Rapid]

To balance things out, a video of some of the well-articulated geniuses and highly contributing members of society on the Remain side.

What's wrong with you older people! Don't you know it's [current year]?!

 

[RackMaster]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

"And I thought America was the country so filled with hate... boo hoo"

 

[Crusader74]

Untrue, good sir, untrue.

I stand corrected so

 

[Florida173]

Has Britain avoided a ‘European superstate’? France and Germany ‘draw up plans to morph EU countries into one with control over members’ armies and economies’

Kind of makes you wonder on what an unchecked organization could achieve.

 

[SpitfireV]

I'd be wary of using the Daily Mail as any kind of reputable source.

Cross check. You know that.

 

[Florida173]

I'd be wary of using the Daily Mail as any kind of reputable source.

Cross check. You know that.

Goes without saying

 

[Ooh-Rah]

I'd be wary of using the Daily Mail as any kind of reputable source.

Cross check. You know that.

Agreed, but it is interesting to me that Daily Mail seems to cover US politics (and the military for that matter) far deeper than most mainstream US publications, and in most cases I can find a 2nd source before I post from them.

 

[TLDR20]

England exits Europe twice in four days after losing to Iceland

Shots fired

 

[RackMaster]

I'd be wary of using the Daily Mail as any kind of reputable source.

Cross check. You know that.

It's legit.

New EU 'superstate plan’ by France, Germany: report

European superstate instead of E.U.?

European SUPERSTATE to be unveiled: EU nations 'to be morphed into one' post-Brexit

 

[Ex3]

An interesting take...

A commenter on the Guardian website has written a post summing up why Boris Johnson may have felt a little glum after the EU referendum vote. Rather than basking in the fact he is the frontrunner in the Tory race to take over from Prime Minister David Cameron, the former Mayor of London may actually be in quite a bind.

If Boris Johnson looked downbeat yesterday, that is because he realises that he has lost.

Perhaps many Brexiters do not realise it yet, but they have actually lost, and it is all down to one man: David Cameron.

With one fell swoop yesterday at 9:15 am, Cameron effectively annulled the referendum result, and simultaneously destroyed the political careers of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and leading Brexiters who cost him so much anguish, not to mention his premiership.

How?

Throughout the campaign, Cameron had repeatedly said that a vote for leave would lead to triggering Article 50 straight away. Whether implicitly or explicitly, the image was clear: he would be giving that notice under Article 50 the morning after a vote to leave. Whether that was scaremongering or not is a bit moot now but, in the midst of the sentimental nautical references of his speech yesterday, he quietly abandoned that position and handed the responsibility over to his successor.

And as the day wore on, the enormity of that step started to sink in: the markets, Sterling, Scotland, the Irish border, the Gibraltar border, the frontier at Calais, the need to continue compliance with all EU regulations for a free market, re-issuing passports, Brits abroad, EU citizens in Britain, the mountain of legislation to be torn up and rewritten ... the list grew and grew.

The referendum result is not binding. It is advisory. Parliament is not bound to commit itself in that same direction.

The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50?

Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?

Boris Johnson knew this yesterday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-manoeuvred and check-mated.

If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over - Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession ... broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this. When he acts like the dumb blond it is just that: an act.

The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poison chalice.

When Boris Johnson said there was no need to trigger Article 50 straight away, what he really meant to say was "never". When Michael Gove went on and on about "informal negotiations" ... why? why not the formal ones straight away? ... he also meant not triggering the formal departure. They both know what a formal demarche would mean: an irreversible step that neither of them is prepared to take.

All that remains is for someone to have the guts to stand up and say that Brexit is unachievable in reality without an enormous amount of pain and destruction, that cannot be borne. And David Cameron has put the onus of making that statement on the heads of the people who led the Brexit campaign.​

The comment, which was picked up on Twitter, has been shared thousands of times.

If true, that is some parting gift.

Guardian Comment On Boris Johnson's Position After EU Referendum Vote Is Pretty Amazing

 

[AWP]

Yet if they don't follow through with the will of the people what message does THAT send? You dirty peasants don't know how the world works? Your voice and vote are irrelevant if we decide that's best? Laws apply except when we want to ignore them?

Love or hate Brexit, this has larger consequences beyond things like the economy or exiting treaties.

 

[Diamondback 2/2]

Yet if they don't follow through with the will of the people what message does THAT send? You dirty peasants don't know how the world works? Your voice and vote are irrelevant if we decide that's best? Laws apply except when we want to ignore them?

Love or hate Brexit, this has larger consequences beyond things like the economy or exiting treaties.

Couldn't agree more with you. From the possibility of telling everyone they really only have a democracy when big brother allows it, to the clambering of if they can do it, so can we assholes.

Coming to a country near you would be my guess.

 

[Isiah6:8]

Love or hate Brexit, this has larger consequences beyond things like the economy or exiting treaties.

This might be the most interesting aspect of the whole vote. Initially, there was some concern that this could have a serious implication economically outside of the UK. That has pretty much been pushed aside at this point barring new information as economists think it could be anywhere of a .2-.5 drag on GDP for the next 4 quarters globally. In the UK we have seen estimates upwards of down 3.6 to UK GDP growth that are reasonable.

This is going to be a very long drawn out process. Some good thoughts on this was the Financial Times article on June 22 referring to this post brexit period as purgatory, not hell for the UK.

 

[Ex3]

Yet if they don't follow through with the will of the people what message does THAT send? You dirty peasants don't know how the world works? Your voice and vote are irrelevant if we decide that's best? Laws apply except when we want to ignore them?

Love or hate Brexit, this has larger consequences beyond things like the economy or exiting treaties.

I also agree since those were the rules the set in place. But imho, I think for something as important as this, a simple majority wasn't enough. It was akin to us making a change to the Constitution; the bar should've been 66.6% to leave the EU.

 

[AWP]

I also agree since those were the rules the set in place. But imho, I think for something as important as this, a simple majority wasn't enough. It was akin to us making a change to the Constitution; the bar should've been 66.6% to leave the EU.

And whatever I think of the deal, this is something I totally support. The problem is NO ONE over there ever thought something so massive could come down such a small difference? Their laws allow for a simple majority instead of something a bit more substantial?

Maybe they'll learn but for now they have to roll with it and reap the whirlwind.