Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace

Discussion > Brexit ..Bubbleworlds and Climate psychology

I would suggest that the appropriate response to the remainer extremists who are now demanding after losing the vote to destroy the UK to get their way is to reject them flat out.
The issue voted on was, as a nation, whether or not to regain local sovereignty and exit the EU.
The issue was clear, and the exit prevailed.
The issue was not "Shall we split up the nation if we don't get our way?"
The nation voted and reached a decision.
If the vote had been 52% in favor of continuing to lose sovereignty to the EU, the remainers would reject t out of hand any calls to split the UK.
Those who prevailed should take the same stance.

Jun 29, 2016 at 3:33 PM | Unregistered Commenterhunter

@SandyS "Hope for the best - plan for the worst."
I note that even tho Jo Coxes pet Charity is Hope not Hate ...Friday's radio was full of her friends showing Hate NOT hope

(see the PROJECTION behaviour ..similar to what we see from Climate Alarmists)

BTW her constituents voted 54.7% for Brexit to 45.3%... MP's are not forced to share views with their constituents, especially if they are only "Chavs"

Jun 29, 2016 at 4:19 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Never would I have thought I would agree with anything posted by Hunter, who has given me nothing but grief here, but I do, wholeheartedly. The will of the people has been determined, and to undermine that is undemocratic. If Scotland wishes to be independent, let it, but only after the UK has separated from the EU. Otherwise they will undermine the UK's barganing position. That is bad enough with two deeply fractured political parties undergoing meltdown and/or leadership squabbles. More distractions we do not need.

Offer Scotland another independence referendum once the main elements of a UK-EU agreement has been reached.

Jun 29, 2016 at 4:31 PM | Unregistered CommenterAlan kendall

Angela Merkel is the leader of the largest economy in the EU.
An economy whose largest market is with the second-largest economy in Europe; an economy that is not quite as dependent upon the EU as the German economy – and that has opened the door to ensure that situation will never arise, now. Face it, EM, Europe is, and will remain, far more dependent on the UK than we have ever been on them. The majority of voters have decided that we should be free of the threat of being tied to such a narrow market, and to being told what to do by an unelected elite. What is it about that that you should find so abhorrent?

What I fear is that the ne’er-do-wells in Parliament will let this opportunity slip (deliberately or not) by endless prevarication. We need ACTION, and we need it soon.

Jun 29, 2016 at 6:02 PM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent

What is needed is a UK opening gambit by somebody.

Jun 29, 2016 at 8:58 AM | Unregistered CommenterSandyS

"Remember the Bismarck"?
Or maybe, "We ain't perfect, but still have a lot of friends around the world. We're not frightened of you and can take the pain. This can be done sensibly."

Jun 30, 2016 at 2:06 AM | Unregistered Commentermichael hart

micheal hart
Doesn't look like being Boris Johnson.

I don't remember the Bismark personally, assuming you're talking about the ship. I do recall that it was as much by good fortune as skill that she was sunk. I also recall that as a 30 year old design it took the Royal Navy a lot of effort to get into a state where the crew scuttled her rather than have the hulk captured. Not sure how its relevant though.

Jun 30, 2016 at 2:15 PM | Unregistered CommenterSandyS

How was it a thirty year old design? It was LIKE the next generation design for Germany at the end of WW1 but it was still a new design and on its first voyage. Apparently the main power cables ran on top of the deck armour and the first incoming shells in the final gunfight took out the power making the ship helpless. Running the power cables on top makes maintenance much easir but other nations took that penalty to put them under the protection.

Jun 30, 2016 at 2:30 PM | Unregistered Commenterrhoda

Alan kendall
That may well be Nicola Sturgeon's idea anyway. Going and talking to EU and national leaders is a good way of pointing out that her hands are tied at least until the end of negotiations.

It may well give an extra impetus to Spanish Catatonian, Basque and Andalusian separatists, look what happened to Scotland politicking.

On the creation of the United Kingdom martial law was declared in Scotland, it's unlikely that while Brexit is being negotiated it'll need to be imposed again in Scotland at least.

Jun 30, 2016 at 2:40 PM | Unregistered CommenterSandyS

rhoda
The Kriegsmarine hadn't built a battleship since the First World War.As warship construction had been banned for Germany until the 1930s they had to react rapidly to re-armament. The design of the Bismark was basically an improved Bayern class from WWI incorporating modern technology and improvements. The hull was mainly welded for example.

German warships in both wars were on the whole robust and difficult to sink. Royal Navy warships because of global commitments made compromises. Also of interest in this discussion the King George V class of battleships had 14" main armament because Britain wanted a limitation on calibre, the German, Italian and French navies went 15" for their ships, the Germans also exceed treaty limit tonnage, The USN had 16" main armament and the IJN went 18", having been first to install 16" guns.

the initial problem for the Bismark was a hit by a torpedo launched from a Swordfish which hit the stern damaging steering gear and possibly a propeller shaft. The Swordfish had previously attacked HMS Sheffield using torpedoes with magnetically triggered fuses. These failed to detonate, fortunately for HMS Sheffield. The attack on Bismark used contact fuses which did work. Having lost contact with the Bismark the radio tracking using Bismark's messages miscalculated her position and sent the Royal Navy task force to the wrong place, and they were behind the Bismark with no chance to catch up. Force H from Gibraltar were sent to intercept, basically HMS Ark Royal equipped with Swordfish, HMS Renown a modernised WWI battlecruiser and HMS Sheffield a modern Light Cruiser along with a destroyer escort. Force H was no match for the Bismark without the ships under Admiral Tovey command, which were low on fuel. Both HMS Rodney and King George V used most of their ammunition without sinking Bismark. As I said good fortune and not for the first time. In her engagement with HMS Hood and Prince of Wales Bismark had suffered a hit which damaged fuel tanks causing her Captain to head for Brest.

Jun 30, 2016 at 3:42 PM | Unregistered CommenterSandyS

Point of order, they built the Panzerschiffe before the accesion of AH and the NSDP. Not relevant to this discussion except to remind us that Germany kept military and naval technology going before the regime change, with the help of the Soviets, the Dutch, the UK and probably others.

Everything you write about the Bismarck is correct. But although hard to sink, it was a hulk by not very long into the fight.
We should have left it and let the Germans try a recovery. An impossible recovery*. You are right the RN had a lot of luck after the disappointment of the Denmark Strait. Luck the Germans had for Cerberus, imho.

* Also imho, a badly damaged ship recovered is a a long repair job and probably it is better to build a new one. Some of the RN's ships took a couple of years to repair (in the US) and were never quite the same again.


It occurs to me that some might consider this a little off-topic. Of course it isn't.

Jun 30, 2016 at 6:00 PM | Unregistered Commenterrhoda

The Machiavellian machinations of the Tory party today leave me gobsmacked to the extent that I do not believe what I am seeing. I have said for some time that Cameron is still scheming and has not given up, I still believe that. The assasination of Boris today came out of the blue but also leaves Michael Gove looking as trustworthy as Hilary Clinton (but with a lot more brains). Weasel words are now flooding from the mouths of the tories as Terry May says that Brexit means Brexit and then says that we must have 'more' control over immigration when actually we voted for total control over immigration. Brexit means UK leaves the EU but it does not mean the tories can not screw us in the negotiations overthe leaving arrangements. My own opinion is that only Leadsome and Fox are trustworthy options for Tory leader, any other opinions?

Jun 30, 2016 at 8:12 PM | Registered CommenterDung

Will the Tory party ever forgive the scandal that caused Foxy to resign? If chosen, would the country? I can't see that he has a ghost of a chance? But who knows anything these days?

Leadsome who? Never noticed her before the Leave campaign.

Backstabbing Mike?

Only Theresa would seem to have a chance IMO.

Jun 30, 2016 at 8:35 PM | Unregistered CommenterAlan kendall

Who cares about following the Tory PM nomination process ?
We play no part so it makes no difference if we follow it every step of the way or just come back in 2 months time and see who they elected.

..It's almost the same for Corbyn vs X, except some of you maybe have a £3 say in his election.

It's their bubbleworld not ours.

Jun 30, 2016 at 10:57 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Radio 4 The Bottom Line with Evan Davis (friend of the green loonies)
he filled the prog with Remain biz people dramaqueens
One woman said "How am I going to trade across Europe I'll have to wait for separate agreements wioth 27 countries"
..You stupid woman the EU is is a common market. Once you are into one you are into them all.
Make an agreement with one country ...say on the channel coast, then all you need to do is drive your van to your distributor in that first country... I guess your European distributor could be YOU yourself setting up your own postal address in that country.

Jul 1, 2016 at 12:09 AM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

What is the relationship between Switzerland and the EU? Wouldn't that be the thing to use as a model?

Jul 1, 2016 at 10:07 AM | Unregistered CommenterMartin A

Martin A.
Being renegotiated as we ponder, so clearly the current situation is not acceptable to the Swiss. As I have seen other commentators write, all relationships are different and the UK is a much more important partner than any other with a trading relationship with the EU. We should therefore expect a better deal and should not try to get a Norway, Canada or Switzerland type deal.

Jul 1, 2016 at 11:31 AM | Unregistered CommenterAlan kendall

An example of double twisted bubbleworld : In the ProgLeft world articles circulating now about agnotology lying to create a political narrative by Brexiteers .. When I checked one today from a Facebookpage I see staggeringly it is itself agnotology.

As ever debunks take much longer than the snappy Facebook posts that promote the bunk in the first place
Here's the example from Bloomberg Culturally Constructed Ignorance Wins the Day JUNE 27 accompanied by a mocking photo of Farage to set the frame

#1 I can spot deceptions straight away
#2 It allows NO comments, so informed readers are unable to share challenges of the claims.
(The sources he links to are often the same)

Lets see if the Bloomberg article's links back up it's authors claim
The author is saying that before the referendum Farage made a claim about £350m and then some hours later retracted it.

Perhaps the biggest was the assertion by Nigel Farage, the loudest advocate for Brexit and leader of the U.K. Independence Party, that leaving would free up 350 million pounds ($460 million) a week that now goes to the EU for use by Britain’s financially stretched National Health Service.
- Seems False ..I have never heard of Farage making that claim.
** I do look forward to someone showing us a quote. **

The author adds

Farage was forced to backtrack on this claim almost immediately.
Since he never made the claim, he didn't backtrack "almost immediately."
- When you check the authors links he doesn't actually link to either "non existent" events. In fact both his links go to different articles about a TV interview made AFTER the referendum where he clearly says he had never made such a pledge.

The TV interviewer seems confused between the UKIP Party of which Farage is the head and the Leave Campaign which was fronted largely by MPs from other parties (like Boris Johnson) and which says Farage was largely sidelined from.
She : "The £350m/week that we send every week to the EU ..can you guarantee that is going to go to the NHS"
Him : "No I can't, and I would never have made that claim, it was one of the mistakes the Leave campaign made."
She :"hang on that was one of your adverts"
Him : "No, it was NOT one of my adverts, I can assure you"
She :"That was one of the Leave Campaign adverts" (Remember Leave campaign is not Farage's responsibility)
Him "THEY made a mistake in saying that..what I can tell you..."
...
Him "I was ostracised by the official Leave Campaign and did my own thing"

The authors put 2 links
#1 "claimed" - goes to a US leftwing website Slate .com dated June 24th. It does NOT feature Farage making the claim

#2 "backtrack ..almost immediately." - dated Friday 24 June 2016 in Article from a newspaper owned by a Russian oligarch called the Independent.
The subtitle of that article is "The UKIP leader said he had never made such a pledge"
(As I said both articles source their quotes from that same TV interview made AFTER the referendum.)

That 2nd link does allow open comments So a commenter points out Farage has always used a different number
"Nigel Farage stated on Question Time (A BBC TV prog) on the 9th of June, weeks before the referendum he did not agree with the £350 Million per week figure used by Boris & Co and said the figure used should be £10 billion a year Net."

When I posted the above debunk on the Facebook page they chose not to challenge me.

Jul 2, 2016 at 12:35 AM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Chiefio has a look at the Canada - EU deal

https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2016/07/01/ceta-canada-e-u-trade-agreement/

Those don't follow Chiefio should have a look at other posts too. He's the most eclectic and tenacious blogger I know.

Jul 2, 2016 at 2:06 PM | Unregistered Commenterrhoda

@Rohodo Chiefo's blog post is a rather long and complex, but by cutting staright to the Conclusion it seems he is saying that the "Trade" agreement has somehow had low of greenregulations stuffed into thru Green NGO's getting an input.
"they have a political dog and pony show to keep attention elsewhere and sneak enforcement into something that ought to just say “OK, we have free trade”."
"CETA Canada European Union Comprehensive Trade agreement
On page 200, the troughing busy body Civil Society Groups get to natter over the proceedings in disputes. So who set up WWF and Greenpeace as government agents?"

..and that it needs to have all this extra stuff stripped out of it , so it just a trade agreement , not a tying the hands of democracy behind the back.

Jul 2, 2016 at 6:34 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

The Graf Spee scuttled per Captain off Montevideo who then shot himself, thinking he'd disgraced himself.
==================

Jul 11, 2016 at 12:41 AM | Unregistered Commenterkim

Bubbleword has come to the fore again with the Leftyverse bleating about "fake news"
.... mere mice in the room compared to the elephants of The Major False Narratives that the same BBC/MSM fire out at us.

Dec 22, 2016 at 3:36 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

MSM squeal about fake news offering pathetic examples
Eg The Pope Endorsed Trump
Eg2 That £350m/week would suddenly be diverted to NHS the day after a Brexit Vote
. .they themselves push huge false narratives.
Some examples

– Anyone who challenges Lefty dogma is Far-Right-wing
– When someone gets rich it’s cos they have stolen the share of the poor (wealth is not one fixed size pie. Ask Steve Jobs how key innovators can make the whole pie bigger)
– The famous climate narratives like “The science is settled” ” Skeptics are funded by a conspiracy of big oil money”, “97% of Climate Scientists say”
(No such robust data exists ..check the sample size and Qns asked)
– Anyone who challenges immigration is a racist.*
– All women are victims and all men oppressors.

* In the 21st century being called racist is the equivalent of being ex communicated in the Middle Ages and assured of being condemned to hell for all eternity .. People will suppress all their common sense and their instincts to avoid this label.

Dec 22, 2016 at 3:42 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Actually BBC/MSM still do publish fake news all the time, which they go hysterical about ..only then to be silent when corrections come in.

Eg today its the "Muslim Youtube star thrown off plane for speaking Arabic"
They put him on loads of shows, whereas I first checked Twitter where people pointed oit his thing on YouTube is hoax videos where he stages acted situations of Muslims being oppressed and then puts it on YouTube as True ..and Guardian readers love things that confirm their existing narrative.

Secondly news has come in about the black church vandalised by "racists who graffitid VoteTrump and set fire to it"
The guy just arrested is black.

BBC/MSM are so worried that no one trusts them anymore that they have set up the Trust.Project
There is a good debunk of it

Dec 22, 2016 at 4:00 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Sadly it seems when big media starts a trust project, the real intention seems to be to sell their fake news by way of repetition. Sort of a customer save department to make a last ditch effort to keep a client by bsing them into staying despite high prices and bad service.

Dec 22, 2016 at 5:06 PM | Unregistered Commenterhunter