The problem we have in the west is that we have been deliberately turned away from God IMO. We are all divided as people and that's our weakness. Muslims are united by Islam and they beat mostly as one heart. They have a uniting means and we do not.
scotia_pict said:You're hypnotised by the german media's echo chamber of more migration.
Holy ****, i think none of german media sources could compete with whoever hypnotised youscotia_pict said:Wherever I look I see madness, media promoted degeneracy, suicidal politics, traitors in government, low western birth rates, sky high Muslim birth rates, a dictatorial intrusive governmental system(EU), anti-Christian rhetoric everywhere, degradation of our towns and cities due to mass forced immigration, homeless and hungry Europeans on our streets, every invader housed and well funded by our tax money, rape-murders-violent assaults by invaders that are covered up by our government and the media.
Oh God. Here comes the Feminazi.
Expand on what you don't agree on. Share you knowledge with the group.
But regardless of what you think of Islam, as long as they're infringing on someone else's rights they can do what they want. If churches are allowed to ring their bells, there is no reason to ban muezzins from making their calls.
Not making your views clear at all.
What do you not understand about this?
To those who wonder why there are mostly men arriving here and can't get the brain to figue out the reason themself, here is a hint:
The way from Syria to Greece is quite hard to make, so young healthy men have better chances of making it than woman or old people.
Those smugglers take a lot of money as well, so many families might only pay for one person to make it. If they sent a man, he might get a job here and earn the money to bring in his family afterwards, a child/old person or woman (in their view) might have it less easy.
-> It would be strange, if it were an other way around.
And to those of you who say they should stay and fight. you are realy lacking empathy. Probably they did for a while, but fighting without the supplies needed for it against armies, just isn't something you would do yourself.
And completly independent of that and what would make the earth a better place:
Treat other the way you want to get treated.
Unlike nazis i don't label people.Oh God. Here comes the Feminazi.
Expand on what you don't agree on. Share you knowledge with the group.
Wherever i look i see solidarity and mutual help, gratitude and diversity, bilingvism, teaching acceptance and tolerance, public depates on the role of religion, refugee housing solutions and shelters, avoiding populism in major respectful media editions, adressing challenges a multicultural society faces, secular state, civil disputs over the issues of collisions between religious and human rights, thinking of a well-being and education of all kids instead of comparing birth rates and regardless of religious/gender/national identity, celebrating dialog, evolution of modern cities and their flexible change.scotia_pict said:Wherever I look I see madness, media promoted degeneracy, suicidal politics, traitors in government, low western birth rates, sky high Muslim birth rates, a dictatorial intrusive governmental system(EU), anti-Christian rhetoric everywhere, degradation of our towns and cities due to mass forced immigration, homeless and hungry Europeans on our streets, every invader housed and well funded by our tax money, rape-murders-violent assaults by invaders that are covered up by our government and the media.
]
How can one show way too nationalism? Wishing to preserve your nation and the rightful people to whom it belongs is human nature.
Rauschgiftsuchtige said:- The claim that immigration would be reduced to tens of thousands was made by the single most prominent Remain politician, David Cameron, and that was a general election pledge six years ago.
Unlike nazis i don't label people.Oh God. Here comes the Feminazi.
Expand on what you don't agree on. Share you knowledge with the group.
Rauschgiftsuchtige said:- The claim that immigration would be reduced to tens of thousands was made by the single most prominent Remain politician, David Cameron, and that was a general election pledge six years ago.
I think this is the least honorable reason to leave but could be exactly what lost Cameron the vote in the referendum. And if a remain compaign could fight a second referendum with a proper answer to the question of immigration it should be able to win regardless of all tens of other issues you listed. Which makes me scared and sad becasue the numbers of refugees Britan adopted over the past years is absurdly small. And when it comes to other European nationals coming to the British market, those are the people willing to work their asses off for a better life, they contribute largely to the economy and they earn and deserve all the benefits they receive.
Well it is clear that very few of these are actual refugees. How come that so many want to go to Germany and the richer countries? Why not settle already in Turkey or Greece where they are safe already? You see. The Geneva convention and those rules made up by the UN are just a joke, and if a country doesn't want to take these people it won't. It just as simple as that. These "rules" aren't laws let alone "higher laws" (nobody can enforce them) and are just guidelines/agreements. They don't have the same status as constitutional law (which is enforced, and therefore truly a law).
"A civilised country is a country in which the rule of law applies. For the moment and in Europe this means respecting human rights." This just does not follow.
Depends which non EU members you are talking about. Norway has to comply with al internal market legislation, also domestically.- The claim that immigration would be reduced to tens of thousands was made by the single most prominent Remain politician, David Cameron, and that was a general election pledge six years ago.
- Non-EU members that access the single market don't have to implement EU regulations anywhere near as rigidly as those that are inside the EU. They only have to abide by EU regulations when actually selling goods to the EU, they don't have to comply with them domestically.
- There are many areas of policy making that non-EU countries have control over that we do currently do not, the most relevant being the ability to opt out of the common external tariff and conclude trade deals with countries outside of Europe independently.
- - EU laws that they do adopt (which is a significantly reduced number) are not binding until they have passed their own domestic laws, which is not the case in Britain at the moment, where we are bound by EU law regardless of whether domestic legislation is in place or not.
-- In Norway's case, for instance, other than the regional development grants they contribute, there is no price as such for single market access. Beyond these development grants, they can choose which EU projects they contribute to.
- Both Norway and Iceland receive money back from the EU. In Norway's case the cost of their contributions to the EU are £115 per capita per year, as opposed to £220 in Britain.
- The population of Britain is approximately five times the population of all the (non-EU) members of the EEA and EFTA combined. We are the single-largest export market the EU now has. As the Remain campaign itself conceded, we can realistically expect a much more favourable deal than even Switzerland or Norway have now.
But regardless of what you think of Islam, as long as they're infringing on someone else's rights they can do what they want. If churches are allowed to ring their bells, there is no reason to ban muezzins from making their calls.
What do you not understand about this?
Are you genuinely that stupid?
Opting out of the customs union? Meaning you would only have a FTA between the EU and UK. And you think that the UK would be able to make better trade deals with the US, Russia, India etc. than the EU?
Quite naieve to think you will get a better deal. Funny that so much British people still have the mindset of the 19th century. But in the 21st century the world is not waiting for Britannia anymore and will not go on its knees to secure deals with the UK.
I don't know where in all your post you said something substantially different from what I said. The EU has no jurisdiction whatsoever in certain policy areas in Switzerland, Norway, Iceland; these countries have greater leeway in the adoption of EU regulations; Switzerland needs bilateral agreement to implement them; Norway has a right of reservation; they can choose what aspects of the EU they fund; they pay less. I was arguing against the idea that an arrangement like Norway's would mean nothing would change in our relationship with the EU.
I said it was realistic to expect it.
What I also didn't say was that Britain can get better trade deals outside the EU than inside it (though the relative economic importance of the EU is declining a great deal faster than the UK's is), but we can negotiate without having to consider 27 other nations or rely on their consent. Outside of the CTA (or institutionalised European protectionism) these trade agreements may actually materialise.
But put your two statements together: the EU can get better trade deals with the rest of the world than the UK, but the UK can't do better than Norway. Why does the size and scale of one matter but not the other? Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, they all do incredibly well without being members of the EU, I don't see why you think the UK should be any different, and I don't know where you could possibly be from that you think the British people need lessons on how to secure workers' rights.
Rauschgiftsuchtige said:The political elite of the UK are on your side of the argument.
Rauschgiftsuchtige said:I didn't advocate that we take the Norway option, I don't pretend to know what relationship the UK will eventually have. What I claimed was that there was a difference between the UK's current relationship with the EU and Norway's. They have to enact less EU regulation; their parliament still has the ultimate right to reject EU legislation;
Rauschgiftsuchtige said:the EU has no jurisdiction over Norway's foreign policy, defence, criminal justice system or its external trade policy;
Rauschgiftsuchtige said:they opt-in to certain EU schemes; they pay substantially less for the privilege than the UK does. Switzerland's relationship is further removed than that. As they are not EU member states, neither Norway nor Switzerland has to abide by anything emanating from the ECJ.
Rauschgiftsuchtige said:You said that the EU can negotiate better trade deals than the UK on its own, this is because it is a bigger market and has more 'clout'. You then said that the idea of the UK having a more favourable relationship with the EU than Norway despite the fact it is a bigger market and has more 'clout' was naive.
Rauschgiftsuchtige said:No one is or was blaming the EU for Thatcher's decimation of the unions, you just seem to possess a very strange characterisation of the British people. The harmonisation of labour rights across the EU is to prevent businesses from relocating to the countries with the least protections and the EU has consistently made collective bargaining agreements the price to pay for membership to the EU or bailout funds, but you are welcome to subcontract the enacting of progressive change to apparently munificent commissioners if you don't trust the ordinary people of Europe to deliver it for themselves.
Rauschgiftsuchtige said:They propose legislation. If you want to talk about the 'adoption' or 'enaction' of it, then we can talk about the Council, which is also unelected.
EDIT: Let's not literally talk about it, I think we have reached an impasse here. I'll continue to claim that these aren't just de jure differences, they are borne out in reality. Your idea that Norway pays less because it has fewer privileges is incorrect, it has the same privileges as Iceland but pays more than twice as much per head. Your analysis of the political elite in the UK is utterly hopeless, we haven't had a government that made any objection to the EU in at least 25 years; New Labour were in government for 13 years and tried to take us into the Euro; very few members of the political elite came out for Leave, and the whole referendum was widely described as an anti-establishment protest vote. It doesn't surprise me at all that someone who displays such flagrant elitism and contempt for ordinary people has lined up on the side of the EU, but where your particular dislike of the UK comes from, I couldn't guess.