Rjan:
the maoster:
Is anyone still actually reading or like me scrolling past looking for the smart arse one liners that someone injects now and again?As I said before it looks like CF has finally met his wordy match and it’ll be interesting to see how far it goes before either one admits defeat.
I predict the forum software will be the first to admit defeat - if not the spectators awaiting the outcome.
Carryfast:
Rjan:
The-Snowman:
Is anyone else wondering if carryfast and rjan are actually the same person?Well, you become so good at playing chess, that eventually the only worthy opponent to play against is yourself.
If it’s chess then like Dolph it’s time to stop the bs and put up or shut up.
When I said it’s like paying myself at chess I was indulging Snowman who asked whether we’re the same person.
It’s not in fact like chess at all, and in between the comic relief I’m treating your arguments and my responses quite seriously.
As a socialist/federalist exactly which side would you have been on ?.Regards Napoleon’s/Stalin’s/Hitler’s/Tito’s idiotic ideas.Or for that matter the Franco/Norman/Plantagenet etc takeover of the British Isles.All being Socialist/Federalist agendas.
The Norman conquest precedes the development of nation states - and certainly precedes Britain as it is today.
I’m sure your understanding of “federalisation” includes every instance of political unification since Dunny-on-the-Wold (total population, 1) ceased to have its own resident sovereign.
Which would obviously include the Battles of Hastings and its aftermath/Borodino/Waterloo/the invasion of Poland etc in 1939/the numerous fights over Scottish and Irish independence culminating in the events of 1916-21 and last but not least the fight between the Slovenian and Croatian militias v the JNA in the breakup of the former Yugoslavia.
Edit to add although Serbia had a legitimate claim against the Austro/Hungarian federation in 1914 that doesn’t mean that it was in our ‘national interest’ to get involved in that argument.Hopefully you’ll see where this is going regards membership of the EU in that regard and the ‘benefits’ of a so called ‘inward looking’ agenda in that case.
.
You seem to manage to hold your bowels long enough during each post to make some coherent (if ultimately quite wrong) arguments at first, but then let loose at the end with a tirade on “federalism” and “socialism” and whatnot.
I’m no expert on all of Europe’s various wars, and I simply don’t follow the logic (if there is any in there) of the point you’re trying to make each time you reel off a list of 20th century dictators and expect me to find some obvious connection between that and the EU question.
Carryfast:
war1974:
carryfast what does it matter - there are all sorts of different folks, if Rjan doesn’t want to join the cult let him and anyone else who has a different opinion to you then accept it as just that.whilst its quite admirable how committed to the cause you are - the way you promote it is wrong.
The issue is clearly that between the two different ideologies of socialism v nationalism.It seems clear which side Rjan is on in that.Which logically puts him and all the other socialist zb wits on the same side as both Hitler and Stalin in the invasion of Poland for just one example.
Whilst I’d be more satisfied to call myself a socialist than a nationalist, I’m quite sure I am not on the same side as Hitler, and to be honest I’ve yet to put my finger on what, if any, is the ideological difference between us.
For all your blather about nationalism, I’d be very surprised if you accepted any of the ugly tenets which are necessary to make that position coherent today, even ignoring the fact that European nationalism has been already tested to destruction once.
Rjan:
Carryfast:
As a socialist/federalist exactly which side would you have been on ?.Regards Napoleon’s/Stalin’s/Hitler’s/Tito’s idiotic ideas.Or for that matter the Franco/Norman/Plantagenet etc takeover of the British Isles.All being Socialist/Federalist agendas.
The Norman conquest precedes the development of nation states - and certainly precedes Britain as it is today.
I’m sure your understanding of “federalisation” includes every instance of political unification since Dunny-on-the-Wold (total population, 1) ceased to have its own resident sovereign.
Which would obviously include the Battles of Hastings and its aftermath/Borodino/Waterloo/the invasion of Poland etc in 1939/the numerous fights over Scottish and Irish independence culminating in the events of 1916-21 and last but not least the fight between the Slovenian and Croatian militias v the JNA in the breakup of the former Yugoslavia.
Edit to add although Serbia had a legitimate claim against the Austro/Hungarian federation in 1914 that doesn’t mean that it was in our ‘national interest’ to get involved in that argument.Hopefully you’ll see where this is going regards membership of the EU in that regard and the ‘benefits’ of a so called ‘inward looking’ agenda in that case.
You seem to manage to hold your bowels long enough during each post to make some coherent (if ultimately quite wrong) arguments at first, but then let loose at the end with a tirade on “federalism” and “socialism” and whatnot.
I’m no expert on all of Europe’s various wars, and I simply don’t follow the logic (if there is any in there) of the point you’re trying to make each time you reel off a list of 20th century dictators and expect me to find some obvious connection between that and the EU question.
The Franco/Norman conquest and Plantagenet cluster zb that followed it actually took out the nation state of England followed by those of Scotland and Ireland.At least until first William Wallace and then the Bruce and much later Michael Collins etc tried and succeeded in breaking that Federalist stranglehold over the right of self determination and national sovereignty.
As for 20th century ‘dictators’ as I said there is a link in the ideology and motivation regards at least Stalin’s and Hitler’s and Tito’s and even the Conqueror’s and Edward 1’s agenda v that of the latest Socialist ideology driven EU project.In that in all cases that motivation is the removal of the idea of the nation state to be replaced by ‘Federation’ and collectivism and centralisation of government power.While in at least Tito’s and Stalin’s and Hitler’s case we can add the typically Socialist idea of ethnic/social engineering either in the form of forced ethnic integration,or ethnic genocide,or even the combination of both.
Which leaves the obvious question as to where you stand on that issue.While if you really think that Franco/Norman/Plantagenet ‘UK’ Federalisation project is too early I’m sure you can at least tell us which side you’re on regards Stalin’s and Hitler’s move on Poland in 1939 and the position of the JNA v Slovenian and Croatian militias in the early 1990’s.Or for that matter even the hypothetical situation of the Texas Nationalist movement declaring secession from Obama’s USA.Assuming we’re not going to apply Socialist/Federalist hypocrisy and double standards regarding the issue of support of the Nationalist ideology v Socialist/Federalist as the USA/EU did in the case of the breakup of Tito’s Yugoslavia. 
Rjan:
Carryfast:
war1974:
carryfast what does it matter - there are all sorts of different folks, if Rjan doesn’t want to join the cult let him and anyone else who has a different opinion to you then accept it as just that.whilst its quite admirable how committed to the cause you are - the way you promote it is wrong.
The issue is clearly that between the two different ideologies of socialism v nationalism.It seems clear which side Rjan is on in that.Which logically puts him and all the other socialist zb wits on the same side as both Hitler and Stalin in the invasion of Poland for just one example.
Whilst I’d be more satisfied to call myself a socialist than a nationalist, I’m quite sure I am not on the same side as Hitler, and to be honest I’ve yet to put my finger on what, if any, is the ideological difference between us.
For all your blather about nationalism, I’d be very surprised if you accepted any of the ugly tenets which are necessary to make that position coherent today, even ignoring the fact that European nationalism has been already tested to destruction once.
No it was Edward 1’s,Hitler’s,Stalin’s and Tito’s ideas of Federalism/ Socialism in the form of the UK,Third Reich,Soviet Union,and Yugoslavia which were tested to destruction and all smashed to a lesser or greater degree by Nationalism and the legitimate right of self determination and National Sovereignty which goes with it.
The fact that most of Europe,including us,France,Ireland and Benelux,Eastern Europe etc and the secessionist states of Slovenia and Croatia have then hypocritically thrown that hard won sovereignty away.Says more about the change in tactics of the Federalist/Socialist agenda in the form of infiltration and bribery instead of armed force,than anything about the clear superiority of Nationalism and the Nation State over that of Socialism and Federalism.
This thread makes my eyes hurt.
eagerbeaver:
This thread makes my eyes hurt.
And sadly that’s why a naive misinformed electorate is possibly about to condemn the fate of future generations to that of all those before them who’ve had to fight against and/or their way out of,the failed,dictatorial,despotic idea of Socialism/Federalism.
I am just a poor deluded lorry driver CF.
Apologies for my apparent disinterest in the discussion.
the maoster:
Is anyone still actually reading or like me scrolling past looking for the smart arse one liners that someone injects now and again?As I said before it looks like CF has finally met his wordy match and it’ll be interesting to see how far it goes before either one admits defeat.
I’m fact checking. I’ll let you all know on Sunday if anythings wrong !! 
Carryfast:
eagerbeaver:
This thread makes my eyes hurt.And sadly that’s why a naive misinformed electorate is possibly about to condemn the fate of future generations to that of all those before them who’ve had to fight against and/or their way out of,the failed,dictatorial,despotic idea of Socialism/Federalism.
And that response is precisely why you’ll never make onto a single persons “let’s invite fun people to a party” list! You obviously have a good grasp of world history and a good grasp of the language, but for the life of me I cannot fathom how such an obviously educated person can make every post look like complete unintelligible gibberish! Seriously CF, read back what you write before you press submit.
Cue “please feel free to explain…” Or some other ■■■■■■■■.
My heart actually goes out to you, I can think of nothing worse than a life devoid of laughter.
Mike-C:
the maoster:
Is anyone still actually reading or like me scrolling past looking for the smart arse one liners that someone injects now and again?As I said before it looks like CF has finally met his wordy match and it’ll be interesting to see how far it goes before either one admits defeat.
I’m fact checking. I’ll let you all know on Sunday if anythings wrong !!
Actually Mike, my heart goes out to you too mate. Whilst I and many others have the freedom to scroll right on by, you on the other hand have to trawl through most of the drivel as part of your job. Michael, I salute you Sir.
Carryfast:
The Franco/Norman conquest and Plantagenet cluster zb that followed it actually took out the nation state of England followed by those of Scotland and Ireland.At least until first William Wallace and then the Bruce and much later Michael Collins etc tried and succeeded in breaking that Federalist stranglehold over the right of self determination and national sovereignty.
This is most certainly the only discussion I’ve ever had where I’ve seen the Plantagenets mentioned in the same context as the EU.
And the objection the Irish had to Unionism was its oppressiveness and lack of democracy. I can’t see how the EU remotely compares.
As for 20th century ‘dictators’ as I said there is a link in the ideology and motivation regards at least Stalin’s and Hitler’s and Tito’s and even the Conqueror’s and Edward 1’s agenda v that of the latest Socialist ideology driven EU project.In that in all cases that motivation is the removal of the idea of the nation state to be replaced by ‘Federation’ and collectivism and centralisation of government power.While in at least Tito’s and Stalin’s and Hitler’s case we can add the typically Socialist idea of ethnic/social engineering either in the form of forced ethnic integration,or ethnic genocide,or even the combination of both.
I just don’t follow your reasoning through all this word salad. The only part I recognise is where you say the EU involves a degree of collectivisation and political centralisation, and I don’t see a problem with that per se (and nor do I see why the average person would).
Perhaps to move forward you should focus on explaining exactly what you think the disadvantages are of a dose of collectivisation and centralisation (that is, to the degree currently favoured by the EU - we can all think of extreme examples of collectivisation, like having to share underpants, which obviously isn’t current EU policy or foreseeable future policy).
Bloody hell Maoster. You have caused me to engage in titillation regarding your comments. As this occurred whilst consuming a hot beverage, the physicality of these circumstances resulted in the vessel concerned (a cup containing tea), to tilt at an angle which could no longer contain the contents situated within.
As the aforementioned vessel was in fact manufactured by cheap labour, I can only conclude that the over supply of cheap labour has contributed to this event. If Thatcher proved anything, her policies down the line have somewhat proven that the Falklands War was indeed a turning point as pointed out by Arthur Scargill.
And let’s be honest, the working man in the suburbs needs to feed his family (based on the Fordist principles). So in fact, the Russians have a great responsibility for the situation in Eastern Europe.
Who without Polish pilots flying British built and designed Spitfires would never have had a Triumph. Talking of which the British car industry never had it so good in the seventies, as Triumph were a major player, and would have maintained productivity well into the following decades had it not been for repeated workforce teabreaks.
SEE. It’s all the teas fault. The demise of the world is closely associated with the contents of my lap.
A GOOD CUP OF TEA. THE MAOSTER HAS SOLVED THE RIDDLE.
suitably wordy. I’m impressed.
Rjan:
Perhaps to move forward you should focus on explaining exactly what you think the disadvantages are of a dose of collectivisation and centralisation
I thought I’d already done that by reference to the right to self determination and national sovereignty in the form of the Nation State.While having pointed out that your support,of the so called ‘advantages’ of centralisation etc,puts you on the same side as such notables as Stalin,Hitler and Tito,among other Socialist/Federalist despots,whose regimes ( Soviet Union/Third Reich/Yugoslav Federation ) all ended the same.Having rightly been slaughtered by the rightful aims of Nationalism as described above.You can obviously add Edward 1’s ‘UK’ to that to a lesser degree at the hands of William Wallace and the Bruce and then Irish Nationalists like Michael Collins.
Carryfast:
Rjan:
The-Snowman:
Is anyone else wondering if carryfast and rjan are actually the same person?Well, you become so good at playing chess, that eventually the only worthy opponent to play against is yourself.
**If it’s chess then like Dolph it’s time to stop the bs and put up or shut up.**As a socialist/federalist exactly which side would you have been on ?.Regards Napoleon’s/Stalin’s/Hitler’s/Tito’s idiotic ideas.Or for that matter the Franco/Norman/Plantagenet etc takeover of the British Isles.All being Socialist/Federalist agendas.
Which would obviously include the Battles of Hastings and its aftermath/Borodino/Waterloo/the invasion of Poland etc in 1939/the numerous fights over Scottish and Irish independence culminating in the events of 1916-21 and last but not least the fight between the Slovenian and Croatian militias v the JNA in the breakup of the former Yugoslavia.
Edit to add although Serbia had a legitimate claim against the Austro/Hungarian federation in 1914 that doesn’t mean that it was in our ‘national interest’ to get involved in that argument.Hopefully you’ll see where this is going regards membership of the EU in that regard and the ‘benefits’ of a so called ‘inward looking’ agenda in that case.
Talking(writing) with you is like arguing with the radio, absolutely no point of it. And as you may know or not now, the intelligent person always back’s away when is facing a radio 
Nothing personal but it is what it is and the whole forum sees it, you should have been a philosophy teacher, not lorry driver.
Dolph:
Carryfast:
If it’s chess then like Dolph it’s time to stop the bs and put up or shut up.Talking(writing) with you is like arguing with the radio, absolutely no point of it. And as you may know or not now, the intelligent person always back’s away when is facing a radio
Nothing personal but it is what it is and the whole forum sees it, you should have been a philosophy teacher, not lorry driver.
So do you support the position of the EU in fining the Romanian government 30,000 Euros per day over the refusal to implement the data retention directive.Or not ?.
Carryfast:
Dolph:
Carryfast:
If it’s chess then like Dolph it’s time to stop the bs and put up or shut up.Talking(writing) with you is like arguing with the radio, absolutely no point of it. And as you may know or not now, the intelligent person always back’s away when is facing a radio
Nothing personal but it is what it is and the whole forum sees it, you should have been a philosophy teacher, not lorry driver.So do you support the position of the EU in fining the Romanian government 30,000 Euros per day over the refusal to implement the data retention directive.Or not ?.
Britain is perfect and EU is the evil Stasi communist regime that want to take your freedoms(like you have any),anyway you happy now?
Dolph:
Carryfast:
Dolph:
Carryfast:
If it’s chess then like Dolph it’s time to stop the bs and put up or shut up.Talking(writing) with you is like arguing with the radio, absolutely no point of it. And as you may know or not now, the intelligent person always back’s away when is facing a radio
Nothing personal but it is what it is and the whole forum sees it, you should have been a philosophy teacher, not lorry driver.So do you support the position of the EU in fining the Romanian government 30,000 Euros per day over the refusal to implement the data retention directive.Or not ?.
Britain is perfect and EU is the evil Stasi communist regime that want to take your freedoms(like you have any),anyway you happy now?
You still haven’t answered the question.Do you support the right of Romania to say no thanks or the EU to hit them with massive fines for failure to comply ?.
Carryfast:
Dolph:
[…]You still haven’t answered the question.Do you support the right of Romania to say no thanks or the EU to hit them with massive fines for failure to comply ?.
But the alternative to compliance with EU collective rules would have been for Romania not to join the EU in the first place, which they did not strictly have to - in which case they’d be subject to tariffs and restrictions (including restrictions on the transfer of EU citizens’ data to Romania).
If you are in the EU, then you have to comply with Data Protection rules (which are predominantly designed to protect individuals).
I can’t see that this is an example of EU tyranny which we should fear. On the contrary, it’s an example of the EU using its collective strength to bring up standards for our enjoyment. The fact that it makes some fly-by-night Romanian companies squeal that they have to protect data is the whole point - it’s supposed to make the spivs squeal, to stop them undercutting those companies who have high standards of data protection.
