My guess is in the event of a no deal brexit the people rioting will be politicians and big business owners ?
Well I’m 30 mins in and I haven’t seen anything nuanced or thought-provoking yet ... we all know that migration is being handled badly and that traffickers profit from it. Two things do strike me though. 1. The essence of her argument so far is that the West does not have the resources to deal with migration. The fact is that we do but those resources are not prioritised to deal with migration (and a whole host of other issues) properly. Rather they are prioritised to maintain the current status quo where the West, and the rich in the West, gets richer and everyone else gets poorer. 2. She isn’t actually speaking in front of an EU audience as claimed. In fact the room is empty of any audience at all apart from her recording crew. No background audience noise. No pauses for any audience reaction at any point, no applause. She is not stood at a lecturn, and there are empty seats all around her. She is just using a little lapel mic for her own sound recording equipment - the room’s PA system with it’s proper microphones that you can see around her is not even switched on. This dishonesty instinctively makes me distrust her. I’ll watch the rest to see if I change my mind.
Yes, most likely, but they're ok to riot, because well.....they're right aren't they and their view is more important than anyone else's. It'll be blamed on leave voters, because had the majority not voted leave then the minority wouldn't have been forced to riot would they.....the poor souls
Do remain voters have a nasty thug version of Britain first? Or are you staying they don't, so therefore remain voters wouldn't riot? So if remain voters wouldn't riot, who do you think will be rioting in the event of a no deal?
Well, my suspicion is that what they are really preparing for is the possible backlash from not leaving on 29th for whatever reason.
With respect, I think it's clear within the headlines that they are talking about leaving with no deal "Cold war plans revived to move royals to safe locations away from London if unrest follows no deal" I appreciate that it's easier to lend credence to the story if we pretend it's about not leaving, and thus it must be right wing brexiters going mental in the streets because their vote wasn't acted upon, kinda fits the narrative of all leave voters being right wing thugs doesn't it. Alas, whilst ideal that's not what they're saying. So either they're concerned about remainer voters and activists kicking off, or they're simply making shit up......it's a quandary
If we can’t remain because of the Irish Border perhaps it will be because of Gibraltar. At least they have back up plans for some things.
Well it ends after a couple more minutes with nothing new. The argument is that the West should stop admitting migrants because we can’t afford to deal with it compassionately and it is changing our countries cultures. The counter-argument of course is that we can afford to deal with it compassionately and it is a force for good enriching our countries cultures. We just need to prioritise better. We need to do this no matter whether you think immigration is a force for good or bad. The fact is, mass immigration will be unstoppable in the 21st Century because of the effects of globalisation and climate change. The “speech” is followed by a video of the “post event press briefing” which is clearly in the same room but with her now sitting down. Here you can see that at best the “audience” for the speech was 15-20 low profile journalists. This lack of transparency about the audience being “the EU” really makes me distrust her and her motives. There is also something about her manner - a certain arrogance and dismissiveness - that makes me feel the same.
So you didn't watch it all the way through and have caught yourself out by your response here. Embarrassing, finderman ... but not unexpected. See, finderman? Dave watched the video. And precisely how do you resolve the fact that the West does not "prioritise" its resources for its own citizens? There are subsistence level (and less) citizens already who do not share the advantages of the well-off in our society. How the Hell can we legitimately allow economic migrants into a country which is not looking after its indigent population? Where is the morality of that? Economic immigrants are welcomed by Merkle et al at the border and then left to rot and fester once they are in the host nation. There aren't the resources to look after the poorest indigent population and there definitely not the resources to add millions of non-English speakers all at once. Have you thought about what is required to make your suggestion a reality? Do you believe that full-on socialism is required to ensure that each person receives what they need by re-distributing the wealth of the nation? Please supply an example where this has worked in the past. It was immediately apparent that there was no audience. I believe that the video described Southern speaking "at the EU", not in front of it but either way, so what? At the end of her monologue, she is addressing an audience in a Q&A. I am not hopeful you will change your mind.
Actually, the plans are being considered for the possibility of a No Deal Brexit - so why would Leavers cause civil unrest if they get what they want? The reports suggest it would be the fluffy little Remainers who would cause trouble.
There are aspects to your paragraph above which, well, I don't know what to tell you. The counter-argument you mention is not looking good, certainly not proven, but you have declared that you are a globalist and a multi-culturalist so there is literally nothing I could say to you, no statistics I could supply ... so I will agree to differ here. So the words are meaningless because there was no one listening there you approved of? Nevertheless, you are hung up on the fact that Southern wasn't addressing some EU committee or other, I'm sorry you were disappointed. Out of curiosity, do you believe that someone like Southern would ever be permitted to directly address the EU? No. No reason. And delivery is most important? Style over content? Really? OK, it is understandable to have an emotional response to a manner one struggles with, in spite of any insight that might otherwise be obtained. Fair enough. It's an anti-Trump thing, I guess.
You think that's bad? The guardian is reporting that the people of London have hired a private security firm to protect the avocado, au jus sauces, saffron and kale supplies. just joking but you could think it's real considering how silly the remain side are getting
If you believe the extreme remainers, all brexiteers are over 75, will they need their zimmers to get to london to riot?
i watched it. it seems you might of skipped over the first 1min25. particularity from 1min. within that wee segment, i think Ross Greer MSP got a wee bit of the "British" treatment last week too come to think of it. so maybe that's something we can agree on.
Yes I am a globalist and a multiculturalist. Proudly so. People have and always will move around the globe. Sometimes more sometimes less. Handled well it can be an enormous force for good. UK and US origins are striking examples of this. As it increases over the coming years we need to deal with it better - rather than allowing the gap between rich and poor to widen even further (as it has over the last 30 years) which will fuel only more migration and further limit our ability to deal with it. Taxing those at Davos effectively would go a long way to giving us the resources to do it. Here’s a video for you to take a look at Oh ... and it doesn’t concern me who Southern was presenting to. What makes me feel I cannot trust her or her motives is the way it was presented to give the impression she was addressing a large, important audience.
I believe we should be able to agree that the first 1:25 was sarcasm/satire. Can we agree on that, at least? Alternatively, please outline who it is you believe Southern was attempting to fool, and how it is you know that Southern was hoping to fool them.
