Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Brexit - The Positives


Ozymandias

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Electric Scooter said:

How bizarre, claiming the EU is not authoritarian yet promoting the removal of Hungarian rights.

and another pearl of a comment from you......

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Destination Unknown said:

Orban is just using the mechanisms already built into the EU's Treaties, how is that in any way "blackmail"?

We're constantly being told that nothing can be agreed until all members agree, but you obviously seem to think that shouldn't apply when it comes to Hungary, so who is really being authoritarian? 🤔

Djisas craist are you people living under a rock? seriously, you either do not follow the news (I am guilty of this in plenty of things) or you really don't understand what he's doing.

Hungarys government has been multiple time warned about how some of its reforms goss against the euroepan treaties, of which Hungary signed, has been warned about funding withholds because of it, and has been warned multiple times of what is perceived as blackmail by other EU members.

Though I agree Orban is a Putin "friend", I do not see him as Russian "puppet" as many have written.

Plenty of countries have vetoed stuff, but not to the extreme as Orban as done.

Hungary rights are still in place, but this can change rapidly and it seems it may happen ar any time, and though I hope it doesn't happen, if it does it will be by Orbans own fault.

Remember that Hungary has rights, and others have rights too, and everyone has obligations too.

Orban is blocking assistance to Ukraine, not delaying but blocking.

Orban has also been warned with Nato about Swedens membership delaying, fortunately it seems it has been resolved too.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Destination Unknown said:

Orban is just using the mechanisms already built into the EU's Treaties, how is that in any way "blackmail"?

We're constantly being told that nothing can be agreed until all members agree, but you obviously seem to think that shouldn't apply when it comes to Hungary, so who is really being authoritarian? 🤔

Hungary is, check the news, plenty of example of Orbam being warned about his reforms and how it goes against euroepan treaties. also chekc what he is trying to implement.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, godnodog said:

Djisas craist are you people living under a rock? seriously, you either do not follow the news (I am guilty of this in plenty of things) or you really don't understand what he's doing.

Hungarys government has been multiple time warned about how some of its reforms goss against the euroepan treaties, of which Hungary signed, has been warned about funding withholds because of it, and has been warned multiple times of what is perceived as blackmail by other EU members.

Though I agree Orban is a Putin "friend", I do not see him as Russian "puppet" as many have written.

Plenty of countries have vetoed stuff, but not to the extreme as Orban as done.

Hungary rights are still in place, but this can change rapidly and it seems it may happen ar any time, and though I hope it doesn't happen, if it does it will be by Orbans own fault.

Remember that Hungary has rights, and others have rights too, and everyone has obligations too.

Orban is blocking assistance to Ukraine, not delaying but blocking.

Orban has also been warned with Nato about Swedens membership delaying, fortunately it seems it has been resolved too.

As a member of the European Union is Hungary/Orbán perfectly entitled to use his veto in order to block something he disagrees with as set out in the EU's own Treaties - "Yes" or "No"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Destination Unknown said:

As a member of the European Union is Hungary/Orbán perfectly entitled to use his veto in order to block something he disagrees with as set out in the EU's own Treaties - "Yes" or "No"?

Answer is Yes, yes and so that there are no doubts here is another yes.

Can, by European treaties, the EU, by decision of its members, suspend some rights of an EU member, if justified? 

> Yes or No?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, godnodog said:

Answer is Yes, yes and so that there are no doubts here is another yes.

So like I said, he's only doing what the EU Treaties are allowing him to do in the first place.

1 hour ago, godnodog said:

Can, by European treaties, the EU, by decision of its members, suspend some rights of an EU member, if justified?

> Yes or No?

Answer is No, no and so that there are no doubts here is another no, because there is nothing in the EU Treaties that allow such a thing to take place, because, now get this, because this is really important, the Remoaners are adamant that nothing can happen in the EU unless all EU members agree to it, and guess which EU member would veto it? 🤔

That's right, Hungary would. Unless of course the Remoaners are blatantly lying through their teeth, and the EU can simply ignore their own Treaties whenever it suits them and just carry on regardless, which would only go to confirm exactly what Brexiters have been saying all along. 🤔

Edited by Destination Unknown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Destination Unknown said:

So like I said, he's only doing what the EU Treaties are allowing him to do in the first place.

Answer is No, no and so that there are no doubts here is another no, because there is nothing in the EU Treaties that allow such a thing to take place, because, now get this, because this is really important, the Remoaners are adamant that nothing can happen in the EU unless all EU members agree to it, and guess which EU member would veto it? 🤔

That's right, Hungary would. Unless of course the Remoaners are blatantly lying through their teeth, and the EU can simply ignore their own Treaties whenever it suits them and just carry on regardless, which would only go to confirm exactly what Brexiters have been saying all along. 🤔https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-threatens-silence-hungary-orban-if-blocks-ukrainian-aid-funds-article-7/

Wrong

 

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/glossary/suspension-clause-article-7-of-the-treaty-on-european-union.html

Quote

"

Suspension clause (Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union)

Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union allows for the possibility of suspending European Union (EU) membership rights (such as voting rights in the Council of the European Union) if a country seriously and persistently breaches the principles on which the EU is founded as defined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for fundamental rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities). Nevertheless, that country’s membership obligations remain binding."

 

 

The link below is not related to current affairs, it's a brief explanation.

 

https://www.politico.eu/article/graphic-what-is-article-7-the-eus-nuclear-option/

 

The below one is recent

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-threatens-silence-hungary-orban-if-blocks-ukrainian-aid-funds-article-7/

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, godnodog said:

Wrong

 

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/glossary/suspension-clause-article-7-of-the-treaty-on-european-union.html

Quote

"

Suspension clause (Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union)

Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union allows for the possibility of suspending European Union (EU) membership rights (such as voting rights in the Council of the European Union) if a country seriously and persistently breaches the principles on which the EU is founded as defined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for fundamental rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities). Nevertheless, that country’s membership obligations remain binding."

 

 

The link below is not related to current affairs, it's a brief explanation.

 

https://www.politico.eu/article/graphic-what-is-article-7-the-eus-nuclear-option/

 

The below one is recent

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-threatens-silence-hungary-orban-if-blocks-ukrainian-aid-funds-article-7/

But it can still be vetoed, because the Remoaners are adamant that nothing can happen in the EU unless all EU members agree to it. And Hungary would obviously never agree to it. Unless of course the Remoaners are blatantly lying through their teeth, which would only go to confirm exactly what Brexiters have been saying all along. 🤔

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having seen the tricks the EU have tried to pull on the UK in the terms and conditions for a free trade agreement then I am not surprised our Irish members are indoctrinated.

Just pick any treaty you want, read through it, and notice the term it tells the country they must portray the EU in a positive light. Yep, its there, its a one-way propaganda campaign where the EU is wonderfully fantastic and can do no wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Destination Unknown said:

But it can still be vetoed, because the Remoaners are adamant that nothing can happen in the EU unless all EU members agree to it. And Hungary would obviously never agree to it. Unless of course the Remoaners are blatantly lying through their teeth, which would only go to confirm exactly what Brexiters have been saying all along. 🤔

well if the remoaners say so...🤧

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, godnodog said:

well if the remoaners say so...🤧

 

Well that is what the Remoaners say. Or are you saying they are talking crap? 🤔

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Destination Unknown said:

Well that is what the Remoaners say. Or are you saying they are talking crap? 🤔

I have no idea what remainers are saying.

I don't live in the UK, thought I find the subject of Brexit interesting, personally I wish all the best for the UK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, godnodog said:

I have no idea what remainers are saying.

I don't live in the UK, thought I find the subject of Brexit interesting, personally I wish all the best for the UK.

But not all treaties within the EU require all of the EU members to agree/join, see the Eurozone as an example where the UK and Denmark as examples.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, godnodog said:

I have no idea what remainers are saying.

I don't live in the UK, thought I find the subject of Brexit interesting, personally I wish all the best for the UK.

Well according to Remainers on here (and elsewhere), nothing can happen in the EU unless it's agreed by every single EU member.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, godnodog said:

But not all treaties within the EU require all of the EU members to agree/join, see the Eurozone as an example where the UK and Denmark as examples.

 

That's because when the UK and Denmark joined the EEC/European Union in 1973 the euro currency didn't even exist. As an existing member prior to the introduction of the euro currency Denmark (and previously the UK) had negotiated an opt-out from the euro and is thus not obliged to introduce it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Electric Scooter said:

Having seen the tricks the EU have tried to pull on the UK in the terms and conditions for a free trade agreement then I am not surprised our Irish members are indoctrinated.

Just pick any treaty you want, read through it, and notice the term it tells the country they must portray the EU in a positive light. Yep, its there, its a one-way propaganda campaign where the EU is wonderfully fantastic and can do no wrong.

They are not tricks. It is just that Brexiters did not understand what Brexit meant. I just posted a GBeebies clip where Rees Mogg is saying import checks will cause harm to the UK economy. He is right, they will. But this is what we agreed to when we left. It is necessary under WTO rules; to protect our agriculture and public health against plant pests; and to prevent our domestic production being undercut by cheap imports. Just because something comes to the UK from the EU doesn't mean it has been checked by them- some is just passing through, so it is not their job to do checks, some is substandard and is being sent to us after being fraudulently certified as safe.

A big part of the problem is that for nearly 50 years we were part of the SM, so politicians and many businesspeople have no knowledge of trading under WTO rules, having known only frictionless trade all their lives.

Having repeatedly delayed Brexit until now, we are only just beginning to see how damaging it is going to be- the damage has only just started.

Edited by pellinore
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, pellinore said:

Having repeatedly delayed Brexit until now, we are only just beginning to see how damaging it is going to be- the damage has only just started.

And when none of that happens, which we both know it won't, what will the next scary negative story you'll latch onto in order to try and BULLY and THREATEN us into submission? 🤔

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, pellinore said:

They are not tricks. It is just that Brexiters did not understand what Brexit meant. I just posted a GBeebies clip where Rees Mogg is saying import checks will cause harm to the UK economy. He is right, they will. But this is what we agreed to when we left. It is necessary under WTO rules; to protect our agriculture and public health against plant pests; and to prevent our domestic production being undercut by cheap imports. Just because something comes to the UK from the EU doesn't mean it has been checked by them- some is just passing through, so it is not their job to do checks, some is substandard and is being sent to us after being fraudulently certified as safe.

A big part of the problem is that for nearly 50 years we were part of the SM, so politicians and many businesspeople have no knowledge of trading under WTO rules, having known only frictionless trade all their lives.

Having to portray the EU in a positive light is very much propaganda.

The WTO has no such remit, the need for border checks is coming from the EU. They are saying if you want to export to us all of your products and services must meet these standards. It has nothing to do with the standard of products and services being sold within the UK by our own companies. 

In a trade agreement both sides have the right to demand imported products and services from their partner meet their own standards. That is fair and reasonable. What is out of order for the Irish is it creates a border undermining their dream of a unified Ireland. What is out of order for Brits is its an attempt to undermine the stability of Northern Ireland so it joins Ireland.

You know, its a potential war at some point in the future. I don`t get why we have been manipulated into the same EU game to grab Ukraine when they have set us up to fall victim ourselves to the same plot in Ireland. Its you that has a lack of knowledge about the WTO, you even have where the source of border checks is coming from wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Electric Scooter said:

Having seen the tricks the EU have tried to pull on the UK in the terms and conditions for a free trade agreement then I am not surprised our Irish members are indoctrinated.

Just pick any treaty you want, read through it, and notice the term it tells the country they must portray the EU in a positive light. Yep, its there, its a one-way propaganda campaign where the EU is wonderfully fantastic and can do no wrong.

tricks?

UK Gov wants one thing, and it has every right to want what it wants, and the EU simply is saying no, cause it has the right to say no.

the Uk wanted Brexit, they have Brexit, now wants a free trade agreement knowing very well they will never get it in the terms they want it and somehow they are being tricked? 

 

PS: kfc hate my iphone, it keeps deleting some words and swapping others, my apologies for my posts having so many errors.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, godnodog said:

tricks?

UK Gov wants one thing, and it has every right to want what it wants, and the EU simply is saying no, cause it has the right to say no.

the Uk wanted Brexit, they have Brexit, now wants a free trade agreement knowing very well they will never get it in the terms they want it and somehow they are being tricked? 

PS: kfc hate my iphone, it keeps deleting some words and swapping others, my apologies for my posts having so many errors.

You clearly need to keep taking the pills.

The trick is that in all EU legal treaties and documentation it instructs the signatory that they must portray the EU in a positive light. You know, as in not presenting a well rounded assessment of a countries continued membership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Electric Scooter said:

 

The WTO has no such remit, the need for border checks is coming from the EU. They are saying if you want to export to us all of your products and services must meet these standards. It has nothing to do with the standard of products and services being sold within the UK by our own companies. 

In a trade agreement both sides have the right to demand imported products and services from their partner meet their own standards. That is fair and reasonable. What is out of order for the Irish is it creates a border undermining their dream of a unified Ireland. What is out of order for Brits is its an attempt to undermine the stability of Northern Ireland so it joins Ireland.

You know, its a potential war at some point in the future. I don`t get why we have been manipulated into the same EU game to grab Ukraine when they have set us up to fall victim ourselves to the same plot in Ireland. Its you that has a lack of knowledge about the WTO, you even have where the source of border checks is coming from wrong.

If the EU demands border checks, its the EU right, what the issue here? Am I missing something?? Is there an agreement exempting border checks? I am not aware of any? Please clarify.

Indeed the NI situation is very tricky, but at the end of the day its British territory, so the British government has final saying, unless there is some international treaty limiting something.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Electric Scooter said:

You clearly need to keep taking the pills.

The trick is that in all EU legal treaties and documentation it instructs the signatory that they must portray the EU in a positive light. You know, as in not presenting a well rounded assessment of a countries continued membership.

ah the pills, yes the pills that I have to take from reading your 90% insane posts. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, godnodog said:

If the EU demands border checks, its the EU right, what the issue here? Am I missing something?? Is there an agreement exempting border checks? I am not aware of any? Please clarify.

Indeed the NI situation is very tricky, but at the end of the day its British territory, so the British government has final saying, unless there is some international treaty limiting something.

Its our choice as to what level we do spot checks on imports coming in.

Export paperwork so the EU can do the checks on its side are actually not expensive or time consuming. Its a 5 minute job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Electric Scooter said:

The WTO has no such remit, the need for border checks is coming from the EU.

Wrong. It is in the EU's interest to have frictionless export trade into the UK- it is the UK producers who are complaining, as they face checks on their exports into the EU. So the EU would be happy for it to continue for ever.

But this arrangement is prohibited under WTO rules as it is unfair to other countries exporting to the UK.

(You haven't lost your ability to speak confidently about things you know nothing about, have you, Cookie?)

Edited by pellinore
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Electric Scooter said:

Its our choice as to what level we do spot checks on imports coming in.

 

depends on what was signed on the brexit deal with the EU and what is the rules of international treaties signed by the Uk, but on a general sense I say let the UK do what it thinks its best with what comes into their territory, Uk land Uk rules.

Edited by godnodog
Link to comment
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.