Jump to content
BANGKOK 26 April 2019 17:23
webfact

EU rebuffs May, says no-plan Brexiteers deserve 'place in hell'

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, rixalex said:

It's beyond me how someone who purports to be a champion for equal rights and a believer in egalitarianism, someone who opposes any sort of selection or discrimination when it comes to colour, religion, sex, race etc, sees no contradiction in also believing that it's perfectly acceptable for a nation to pick and choose when it comes to nationality.

 It is not a question of picking and choosing; it is a matter of an agreed international treaty. Each and every nation state is perfectly at liberty to sign treaties with other nation states giving reciprocal rights to their citizens in each other's state. As long as these rights do not exclude anyone on the basis of their race, religion, gender, sexual preference etc., then I certainly have no problem with that.

 

The Freedom of Movement directive is part of a treaty signed by all EU members, all EEA members and Switzerland which allows their nationals certain, but not unlimited, rights in the other signatory states; a reciprocal agreement.

 

Do you also consider the Common travel area between the UK, RoI, Isle of Man and Channel Islands, which has been in existence since 1923, to be equally or, as it gives more rights, even more discriminatory than the FoM directive?

Edited by 7by7
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^^^^^^

 

Self portrait?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

^^^^^^^^

 

Self portrait?

Not quite that big and a far lot older with no hair!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 It is not a question of picking and choosing; it is a matter of an agreed international treaty. Each and every nation state is perfectly at liberty to sign treaties with other nation states giving reciprocal rights to their citizens in each other's state. As long as these rights do not exclude anyone on the basis of their race, religion, gender, sexual preference etc., then I certainly have no problem with that.

 

The Freedom of Movement directive is part of a treaty signed by all EU members, all EEA members and Switzerland which allows their nationals certain, but not unlimited, rights in the other signatory states; a reciprocal agreement.

 

Do you also consider the Common travel area between the UK, RoI, Isle of Man and Channel Islands, which has been in existence since 1923, to be equally or, as it gives more rights, even more discriminatory than the FoM directive?

I've stated my position very clearly, multiple times. I don't agree with discriminating immigrants based on race, religion, gender, sexual preference etc... and nationality. Your position is that all discrimination is wrong, except for when it comes to nationality, and then it's ok because, "this is the way the world works", or "this is how it's always been" or "this is what every country does".

 

It's hard, i admit, to argue with such compelling arguments.

 

Tebee is the only consistent remainer on this forum i am aware of, when it comes to FoM. He thinks it should be extended to all immigrants, not just those in the EU. I don't agree as i don't think for one, it is sustainable to simply open your door to all and sundry, but i will say this, at least his position is consistent and doesn't discriminate in any way, rather than the position of all the other remainers who simply abhor certain types of discrimination, but not all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, samran said:

Don’t flatter yourself...

This from the man who recently asked of me, "wow, do you know me?".

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rixalex said:

This from the man who recently asked of me, "wow, do you know me?".

 

555

 

You are very good at giving it. Less good as taking it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 It is not a question of picking and choosing; it is a matter of an agreed international treaty. Each and every nation state is perfectly at liberty to sign treaties with other nation states giving reciprocal rights to their citizens in each other's state. As long as these rights do not exclude anyone on the basis of their race, religion, gender, sexual preference etc., then I certainly have no problem with that.

 

The Freedom of Movement directive is part of a treaty signed by all EU members, all EEA members and Switzerland which allows their nationals certain, but not unlimited, rights in the other signatory states; a reciprocal agreement.

 

Do you also consider the Common travel area between the UK, RoI, Isle of Man and Channel Islands, which has been in existence since 1923, to be equally or, as it gives more rights, even more discriminatory than the FoM directive?

I guess people who don’t agree with discrimination based on nationality therefore  - to be consistent of course - would apply for tourist visas when going traveling in the same way those from countries who don’t have such flexible visa on arrival arrangements. 

 

Shlepping down to the embassy each time you want to go somewhere with rhemes of documents and financial statements. 

 

Of how liberating and egalitarian of one! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, samran said:

555

 

You are very good at giving it. Less good as taking it. 

Taking what?

 

The fact that you've gone from accusing me of having some sort of peculiar interest in you (an accusation i have since notice you like to make of others too - some sort everyone is interested in me complex perhaps?), to then claiming to know how i dress and appearing on my list of recent visitors to my profile page.

 

I have no problem taking that. At least you're being consistent with the double standards and hypocrisy expressed on other matters.

 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rixalex said:

Taking what?

 

The fact that you've gone from accusing me of having some sort of peculiar interest in you (an accusation i have since notice you like to make of others too - some sort everyone is interested in me complex perhaps?), to then claiming to know how i dress and appearing on my list of recent visitors to my profile page.

 

I have no problem taking that. At least you're being consistent with the double standards and hypocrisy expressed on other matters.

 

Dunno mate. You were the one who saw fit to crown me some sort of human rights hero - though I’ve never claimed to be one.

 

Maybe with your man-crush on me shattered when i turned out not to be the short-shorted man of your dreams? 

 

As for looking at your profile. Wow...you got me.

 

Given you were so sure that all my previous posts have been examples of human rights purity, I did indeed go back and look after asking myself ‘who the f%^# pays that much attention to what i write?’.  

 

But only you know the real answer to that question....

 

But enough of that now. Back on topic, as I’m sure you’ve read once or twice - no doubt - you’ll remember I’m actually pro-brexit.

 

Bring on a no deal end of March. Someone like me stands to gain most out of it.  It’s all upside for me.

 

I just think you are wrong for doing so, and for the most part have laid out why. 

 

But i leave you with another picture at the risk of it leaving you flustered. 

 

 

310EDCF6-268C-4B37-A9FA-353EEAFCAD19.jpeg

Edited by samran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, samran said:

 

 

 

310EDCF6-268C-4B37-A9FA-353EEAFCAD19.jpeg

Wow! Is that really you? That's one serious lunchbox. Respect.

 

I can see now why @rixalex has a crush on you.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Wow! Is that really you? That's one serious lunchbox. Respect.

 

I can see now why @rixalex has a crush on you.

Me on a good day. I don’t always scrub up so well! 

 

Interesting that a picture of a bloke in short shorts get posted and we have replies wondering who fatasizes about whom wearing these shorts? 

 

Strange that it is usually the mullet that gets people hot and heavy. 

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, samran said:

Strange that it is usually the mullet that gets people hot and heavy. 

The very same people who have secret liaisons with ladyboys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Spidey said:

The very same people who have secret liaisons with ladyboys.

Not that there is anything wrong with that of course...

 

Just it is a bit like brexit, you have to know what you are taking home! 

Edited by samran
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, rixalex said:

I've stated my position very clearly, multiple times. I don't agree with discriminating immigrants based on race, religion, gender, sexual preference etc... and nationality. Your position is that all discrimination is wrong, except for when it comes to nationality, and then it's ok because, "this is the way the world works", or "this is how it's always been" or "this is what every country does".

 That is not what i said; why do you continually misquote?

 

I said that what you call discrimination based upon nationality is in fact rights extended to thos nationalities due to bi or multi national agreements between countries.

 

Such as the 1923 agreement which set up the CTA. If you have previously answered a question on that I must have missed it, so perhaps you will indulge me by answering mine

16 hours ago, 7by7 said:

Do you also consider the Common Travel Area between the UK, RoI, Isle of Man and Channel Islands, which has been in existence since 1923, to be equally or, as it gives more rights, even more discriminatory than the FoM directive?

 

Samran has raised the issues of visit visas.

 

As a Brit I am one of those 55 nationalities who can enter Thailand for up to 30 days as a tourist without a visa. Are you saying that is discrimination which should be stopped? If so, I doubt you'll find many on here who would agree; especially amongst the visa runners!

 

I'm not sure if you were among them, but when the issue of post Brexit freedom of movement for Brits has been discussed before many Brexiteers were convinced us Brits would still be able to holiday in the EU without a visa post Brexit; and they are probably right. Do you consider that to be discrimination? Do you believe that we Brits should be made to obtain a Schengen visa for a fortnight on one of the Costas? After all, most non EU, EEA or Swiss nationals, including Thais, have to.

 

But as you feel so strongly about this, whenever you travel internationally you doubtless always in future apply and pay for a visa, even when you do not require one for your destination because of your nationality.

 

Yeah, of course you will; when

Image result for pigs might fly

Edited by 7by7
Addendum
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...