Jump to content

JFKvsNixon

Members
  • Content Count

    20,796
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by JFKvsNixon

  1. A lot of stuff imported into the UK from outside of the EU comes via Rotterdam. Which leaves the question, do we have the staff and the facilities to introduce a new system and then implement it without any hiccups and delays? I'm not so sure. Remember that supermarkets don't really have warehouses to store food anymore, it's uneconomical to do so. It gets imported and then distributed, so there is no slack in the system. There is serious potential for food shortages.
  2. I'm talking about the period of 14 days after a confidence vote, where another government can formed that will "command the confidence of the House" without the need for another General Election.
  3. Isn't it 14 days for a successor government to be formed that will command the confidence of the house? One of the things that Parliament could insist upon to a new government, could be that parliament wants to be included with/take over any further negotiations. A quick read also confirms that the House of Commons could also call for a General Election. Either way, this would be a significant change of circumstances that may sway the EU into accepting a longer extension. Personally I feel that that the only way out of this mess would be another General Election, although if that remained deadlocked with another hung parliament then god knows where we'd be.
  4. How can the PM even try to negotiate with the EU, now it's obvious that the Parliament has lost confidence in her? After all why should they waste their time negotiating with someone who doesn't the power to initiate any changes. What I cannot understand is how can Parliament allow this situation to carry on. It seems to me that they need to either, initiate a no confidence motion in the government or accept May's deal. To do nothing is the worst of all worlds. Looking forward, the future does look bleak, how does any further government expect to govern a split country, where both sides are so entrenched that there's very little room to find a common ground between them.
  5. When the PM lost her majority after the last General election, she should have either stood down or put together an all party commission to negotiate Brexit. Without a clear mandate in the House of Commons how could she expect to push through the most divisive issue of our times? The only way out of this mess is for a new government to take us forward, this current one does not have the authority over the House of Commons, so we must be approaching the time for a no confidence vote and the ensuing General Election.
  6. I can't see many Brexiteers putting their head above the parapet. Those who're willing to throw their hat in the ring are far too divisive to get enough votes to win a Tory leadership contest, so at this moment the most likely pro-Brexit PM you could get would by Corbyn. How would you like that?
  7. When you consider how easily you've been taken in by a such simple piece of propaganda, does it lead you to question what other opinions may have also been formed by propaganda?
  8. Didn't Scotland phase out tuition years ago? Are you talking about the first vote in the 1970's or the second vote three years ago?
  9. The best summing up I've heard of the UK's two political parties was: the Tories want to take us back in time to the 1950s and Labour wants to take us back to the 1970s. What happened to forward looking politics in the UK?
  10. If we voted to stay in the EU, it wouldn't have been a vote to stay in whatever the circumstances. If the situation had changed drastically, for example we were going to join the Euro, I would have expected another vote to confirm or reject those circumstances. During the referendum campaign the idea of a no deal Brexit was dismissed out of hand by the Brexiteers. Now the situations changed, and it's looking like a no deal Brexit could be a real possibility then what's undemocratic to give the people their say on the matter?
  11. The current approach started this year, with it becoming compulsory within the national curriculum in February. Also, I'm not sure that my idea that FGM should treated the same as other forms of sexual abuse is currently the case. Also, where are we going to get the professionals to carry out the intimate checks on the young girls genitalia? Currently some young girls have been in foster care for months waiting the checks. So how would we handle you idea of every muslim girl being checked annually?
  12. A lot of Brexiteers do seem to be suffering from a form cognitive dissonance when it comes to Brexit. When I question them on how Brexit could effect our economy, and point out to them that even the most positive people leading the Brexit campaign say it could take 50 years until we see the benefits of Brexit. They say that the financial hit would be worth it so they 'can take back control'. So when I point out that that the financial hit that they're talking about would include a cut in funding to the NHS, less police, weaker armed forces, bigger class sizes in schools and smaller investment in the country's infrastructure, they seem to switch off. They refuse to accept that it could be a possibility, and fall back onto the tired rhetoric of 'we survived for hundreds of years prior to the EU and we'll survive afterwards'. Or my favourite, 'we stood alone for part of WW2 we can stand alone again'. Which is pretty ironic when you consider that we ended up having rationing for almost ten years after the end of WW2. Imagine if this was a general election, and a party was arguing for higher taxes and less public spending! They'd not get close to winning a seat. Somehow though, it seems that giving Jonny Foreigner a bloody nose has now become higher priority than the welfare of our country.
  13. I'd assume that nationalisation of the railways would be made via an act of Parliament.
  14. Where does he say the shapeshifting lizards stand on Brexit?
  15. I don't see myself, or others, being considerate as to what we say to the media/social media as being an erosion of a freedom of expression. I'm perfectly free to express whatever I want on the media/social media, but then I have to be prepared to held accountable for my actions. I am also free to be more circumspect about how I express my more controversial opinions. Here is one of the issues with modern society, controversial or not you can decide! Increasingly more, we want the freedom to say or act however we please, but we don't want any of the accountability/responsibility that often goes with that freedom. Without a degree of accountability/responsibility, many freedoms end up becoming meaningless.
  16. I did explain why social media posts should be regarded as being similar as other media statements such as TV or the press. Here's what I said: So if the student social worker in question qualified as a social worker, and was involved in cases where he decided upon whether or not a homosexual parent kept their child. Can you see the mess that would be unearthed if at least one of the homosexual parents found out about the social media posts, and suggested that his prejudice effected his judgement.
  17. Ok, lets look at the potential consequences on allowing a social worker to express their views without any accountability. Image a social worker who gave interviews on TV and to the press suggesting that homosexual couples shouldn't be allowed to raise children, being involved in case where they had to decide upon the future of child who had a homosexual parent. It would be a legal minefield, and it's easy to see the ramifications. The issue with many social media posts, is that just like traditional media like the press or TV, it's accessible by the public, and it'll remain in the public domain. The same standards must therefore exist for social media posts, as they would for the TV or the press, if people are to continue to trust that profession. The civil engineer/accountant may well have to find another job if they have brought such a negative press upon their employers, that their customers consider retaining them, or they start to struggle to find new customers.
  18. Of course it is. If I feel the need to say whatever I want on social media without fear of being held professionally accountable then I could always choose another job. Like most people, I accept that there is a code of conduct that I must adhere to, in and out of work, if I am able to do my job.
  19. Couldn't that be the case in other forms of sexual abuse, where the abuser is a member of the same family? In that situation we try to educate and empower the individual that's being abused, so they feel like they're going to be listened to and acted upon. So why not use the same approach with FGM?
  20. At the risk of repeating myself, the person in question wasn't barred because he had his views, it was the act of expressing those views on social media that got him barred. Lot's of professional bodies, employers and other organisations are very strict on what should be shared on social media and what shouldn't, when you are posting views that can be traced to you, and ultimately them. For me, the guidance is that I should not post anything that I would not say if I was interviewed on TV. I think that that is probably the best way to manage it going forward. Does this mean that I feel that I am stopped from expressing any particular point of view privately? Of course not, I'd say things to friends that I'd never post under my own identity on social media. I just recognise the importance of having a professional public face and a private life.
  21. ?????? So for you the only options we have - are to do nothing abut FGM, or force young girls to have their genitalia examined? Can you seriously not see any other options. How do you believe that we should deal with the problem of sexual abuse of young girls in general? Do you believe that we should force all young girls to have their genitalia examined annually, or should we do nothing? Or maybe in that situation you're able to conjure up other options?
  22. As I said, I struggling to understand the mindset that believes that this suggestion is in someway acceptable.
  23. I have to ask here, what is your motivation? How would you feel if you had a young daughter, she was forced to have her genitalia examined annually to ensure that you're not abusing her? Would you accept that? Would that feel proportional to the risk that she faced? As to the question of what we should do, I'd suggest that we should take a similar approach that you would for any form of sexual abuse suffered by minors. We have to educate and empower the young person, so they feel able come forward the report the abuse, coupled with harsh punishments to the abusers.
  24. I agree, and I'd say by saying that his view is shared by a significantly number of people here in the IK as well. A few years ago these people would have kept their views to themselves, but now it seems that people believe it is far more acceptable to share such views.
  25. You really do wonder where our society is heading when it's being suggested that pubescent girls should be forced to have their genitalia checked annually for their own protection. I am lost for words.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.