Grandpa:
Activists in general are single issue type of people, whatever the cause they embrace. Femi was no different; an amateur pretending to be independent crowd funded who got taken apart by a professional interviewer. It’s not that he was funded by pro-European groups, it’s that he tried to deny it and had a ‘manager’ there to stop the interview when things got too tough for him, which they quickly did.
Femi, was asked a (perfectly legitimate) question about funding. He tired to answer, and was legitimately challenged on his out of date answer. It seems evident that he didnt have as much up to date information as his experienced journalist questioner. Yep, an amateur vs a professional with the backing of Rebel Media. He is not the experienced ex-barrister, shiny suited, politician with slick, ready prepared answers to trot out ignoring any questions put. He seemed to be trying to engage with his interviewer rather than just spewing "the party line" as too many do. The interview stopped, and then, restarted of course. That is when Katie got stumped isnt it? When he asked how leaving the EU would benefit ordinary people. She offered a nice warm feeling. She couldnt honestly respond to his suggestions that the most likely outcome to Brexit is a falling of living standards in the UK. Katie, the professional, with international financial backing from a rich media company couldnt give a good reply there could she?
In the shortened version you linked there is one story, in the longer version there is another.
Grandpa:
Documentaries are interesting, whether you label them propaganda or not. If they contain inaccuracies they become conspiracy theories, which is the difference between a documentary and a conspiracy theory. Brexit the Movie focused on the reality of the EU, which part did you find to be false and if its propaganda, is it the same kind of propaganda that the government spent £10m of your taxes on posting remain leaflets to every household before the referendum?
Whether or not the Gov leaflets were propaganda is independent of the legitimacy of the film. It really is naughty of you to try and link the two. Would any political-science student be allowed to do such a thing? The film should be examined and defined for what it is independently.
A film with a deliberately restricted viewpoint, designed to influence, is in my book, propaganda.
Grandpa:
Your problem Franglais is that you’re unsuccessfully trying to defend a private institution that says it represents European values, but in reality is self-admitted undemocratic, wants to abolish national identity and states and whose leaders never have to face the electorate.
Which “private institution” is that? Are you alledging now that the EU is privately owned? Wow! “They” slipped that one past us didnt "They". That really is one who the conspiracy theorists to pick up on. If you are referring to the EU, as I assume you are, my defence of it has largely been restricted to questioning your unsupported and misleading statements and assertions. I dont think Ive said anywhere that the EU is above reproach. Of course its not. Unlike many I accept that perfection doesnt exist. But if you want to tear down the EU, what do you offer as replacement? We looked at that before. Your assertion we could trade as "we did for hundreds of years before" doesnt stand scrutiny does it. I challenged your statement and you didn`t respond. You also faied to address your examples of Norway and Switzerland as possible models for us.
Look above, you say “self-admitted undemocratic”. That could be slack use of language, or it could be a deliberate twisting of words. Where has the EU admitted to being undemocratic? Or are you getting mixed up with the phrase “democratic deficit”?
The EU has said in the past that it was conscious of a “democratic deficit”. It said it wished to rectify that, and has been taking steps to do so.
We covered this earlier in the thread, and I asked you if the UK system was notably better, whether our current MPs were serving the public as they should. Whether the UK way of having an unelected second chamber and ministers (sometimes unelected) being within the private gift of the PM was better? If we have a Tory leadership change we could have a new PM and possibly a clown like Johnston appointing a Chancellor and Foreign Secretary. I asked where there exists a perfect system.
I didn`t see much in reply.
“wants to abolish national identity”
Again, you mentioned this earlier. I challenged you to say where this comes from? Again, no answer.
So, come on, what are you referring to?
Grandpa:
The Internet is full of warnings about what the EU really is, there really is no excuse not to know.
The internet is full of many things. There are for instance many wacky conspiracy theories, and YouTube videos with truths, half truths, mis-directions and lies.
