'No - Deal Brexit' vs 'Operation Fear' Globalist Pushback ... Impact to World Economies and Oil

[Alex Palamas + 52]

7 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

 

 

Uncontrolled immigration is a trigger topic.  Many people go bonkers, verboten to discuss, thus proclaimeth the PC speech police in the UK and EU.

UK PC police forbids free discussion about uncontrolled immigration?  Solution: Brexit.  Law of Unintended Consequences.  Brexit will likely cut off the flow of uncontrolled immigration which the EU / Brussels Globalists enforce onto unwilling member countries.

 

john-cleese-tweet.webp 35.4 kB · 0 downloads

Yes agreed.. But look how things go.. Londoners do not seem to mind the multiculturalism of their metropolis, it somehow works for London, maybe not for Coventry but it does for London..

Again, here is the reply.. Cant name any EU country that supports female genital mutilation right? In fact many EU countries have specific and strict laws towards even wearing vail in public.. This is precisely what am saying, cant u see?? The energy of the person (who is largely misinformed and fanaticised to support someone else's aims) is directed towards the wrong target..

 

Edited August 26, 2019 by Alex Palamas

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Alex Palamas said:

Londoners do not seem to mind the multiculturalism of their metropolis

Think Cleese's point is that there are barely any 'Londoners' left anymore.

LOL anyway ... no more Brexit!

Edited August 26, 2019 by Guest

[Alex Palamas + 52]

Just now, DayTrader said:

Think Cleese's point is that there are barely any 'Londoners' left anymore.

He talks about English and I mean London has also received tons of internal immigration as well over the years so not sure.. BoJo has tried to make it even more multi-friendly etc as a mayor.. I totally understand the Englishness argument but a capital city I think needs to be treated as a different animal..

[NickW + 2,714]

2 hours ago, Alex Palamas said:

Yes agreed.. But look how things go.. Londoners do not seem to mind the multiculturalism of their metropolis, it somehow works for London, maybe not for Coventry but it does for London..

Again, here is the reply.. Cant name any EU country that supports female genital mutilation right? In fact many EU countries have specific and strict laws towards even wearing vail in public.. This is precisely what am saying, cant u see?? The energy of the person (who is largely misinformed and fanaticised to support someone else's aims) is directed towards the wrong target..

 

Because the majority are immigrants or white lefty metropolitans. The Indigenous (and I include some Afro Carribeans / Asians that are 2/3 gen) population of the East End and East London have moved to places like Basildon. Areas that have managed to maintain a more British population (Havering in East London) supported Leave. White east enders will often state they have been ethnically cleansed. 

Eastenders (Soap Opera) should be filmed here

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basildon

 

BTW - several black and asian londoners I know voted for Brexit. When they came or their parents / grandparents  came the annual immigration figures were 30-50K a year which was pretty much the case from 1945 to 1997. Blair then got in and cranked it up to 500K a year with his rub their noses in diversity agenda. There position was - the rate of migration is way too high and they were also concerned that this would stir ethnic tensions. 

Edited August 27, 2019 by NickW

[NickW + 2,714]

2 hours ago, Alex Palamas said:

He talks about English and I mean London has also received tons of internal immigration as well over the years so not sure.. BoJo has tried to make it even more multi-friendly etc as a mayor.. I totally understand the Englishness argument but a capital city I think needs to be treated as a different animal..

My wife is Iranian and sumed it up to a T

She said to her Brother in Tehran imagine walking through parts of Tehran and hearing all sorts of languages being spoken except Farsi. That is what it is like now. 

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, NickW said:

When they came or their parents / grandparents  came the annual immigration figures were 30-50K a year which was pretty much the case from 1945 to 1997. Blair then got in and cranked it up to 500K a year

Exactly, I read 30k a year, then since 2000 its been 300k+

29 minutes ago, NickW said:

She said to her Brother in Tehran imagine walking through parts of Tehran and hearing all sorts of languages being spoken except Farsi. That is what it is like now. 

True, and that isn't just London. This is what Cleese was saying. London votes Remain. Funny that. 

''Because the majority are immigrants or white lefty metropolitans''. - NickW

Edited August 27, 2019 by Guest
addition

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

7 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Disagree, by all means but follow the style of @Jan van Eck and wow us with your intellect, not your invective. 

That is most gracious of you, Ward!

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

3 hours ago, Alex Palamas said:

Again, here is the reply.. Cant name any EU country that supports female genital mutilation right?

Well, do you tolerate male genital mutilation?  

If you object to performing cutting on female genitals (the labia), then logically you would abhor the idea of doing a bris on male genitalia.  Otherwise, the posture is one of sexist fallacy.  And that would imply outlawing the practices of the Jews (the ones in Europe and America, in any event.  they don't do that bris cutting in Russia, interestingly enough.) 

It would seem that if the head-scarf is going to be outlawed for Arab (Muslim) women, then the bris should also be outlawed for Jewish males. Both are offensive religious undertakings, at least offensive to Christian European culture.  Butchering a baby is offensive to the sensibilities of, say, the Germans, so if you want to go live in that country, then no bris allowed.  Sounds about right to me. Logical, anyway. Besides, the baby has not given informed consent, so in the USA context, that would be violative of the Fifth Amendment. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

19 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

I've quite literally paid millions in taxes. I'm more than confident I've "paid my fair share". Net contributor indeed.

Yup, it gets expensive to be successful.  I commiserate with you.  You pay for a lot of societal excess, mostly unnecessary stuff. 

[Alex Palamas + 52]

4 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Well, do you tolerate male genital mutilation?  

If you object to performing cutting on female genitals (the labia), then logically you would abhor the idea of doing a bris on male genitalia.  Otherwise, the posture is one of sexist fallacy.  And that would imply outlawing the practices of the Jews (the ones in Europe and America, in any event.  they don't do that bris cutting in Russia, interestingly enough.) 

It would seem that if the head-scarf is going to be outlawed for Arab (Muslim) women, then the bris should also be outlawed for Jewish males. Both are offensive religious undertakings, at least offensive to Christian European culture.  Butchering a baby is offensive to the sensibilities of, say, the Germans, so if you want to go live in that country, then no bris allowed.  Sounds about right to me. Logical, anyway. Besides, the baby has not given informed consent, so in the USA context, that would be violative of the Fifth Amendment. 

And where exactly have I implied that I agree with any sort of mutilation (including brain mutilation that seems pretty common round here)?

Where exactly have I mentioned my allegiance to religious beliefs? I would rather eat glass than say hello to a God..

Why are we talking about sexist fallacies if they are not brought up or not really relevant to the topic? Freudian slip or sometimes a cigar is just a cigar?

[Alex Palamas + 52]

 

6 hours ago, NickW said:

Because the majority are immigrants or white lefty metropolitans. The Indigenous (and I include some Afro Carribeans / Asians that are 2/3 gen) population of the East End and East London have moved to places like Basildon. Areas that have managed to maintain a more British population (Havering in East London) supported Leave. White east enders will often state they have been ethnically cleansed. 

Eastenders (Soap Opera) should be filmed here

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basildon

 

BTW - several black and asian londoners I know voted for Brexit. When they came or their parents / grandparents  came the annual immigration figures were 30-50K a year which was pretty much the case from 1945 to 1997. Blair then got in and cranked it up to 500K a year with his rub their noses in diversity agenda. There position was - the rate of migration is way too high and they were also concerned that this would stir ethnic tensions. 

You guys seem really biased, I am sorry. I have said multiple times, I totally get it and agree.. I am happy to even accept what you say about ethnic cleansing, key issue remains, the problem of immigration is heavily blamed on the EU, but you guys opt not to realise that much of it is the doing of your internal system and not the EU..

Edited August 27, 2019 by Alex Palamas

[Alex Palamas + 52]

20 minutes ago, Alex Palamas said:

here position was - the rate of migration is way too high and they were also concerned that this would stir ethnic tensions. 

You persistently paint a positive picture when u talk about the views of your folk.. Thats fine, but there is also the possibility, for some of us that would be a certainty, that they are not just thinking about ethnic tensions and frictions but actually feel economically marginalised and worse off, so they voted to save their skin.. Legit as well, in my opinion thats the basis and the ref proves it..

Its also interesting that u include the 2/3 gen populations in the discussion, just reflect on the passage of time my friend and think what your kids might say about their Eastern EU friends in 30 years from now.. (I dont mean to say that u have kids or that they have east EU friends, just an example).. 

I dont mean to compare immigrants just simply saying that what is perceived as a problem of immigration in the UK might be extrapolated by the EU but is caused really fundamentally by the UK govts approach towards social engineering and low tier job competitiveness..

A simple comparison of head-counts can prove my point, it is very pedantic even.. Lets just be academic and say things as they are not just blame the structure for which we have inherent negative bias.. There are cities in the UK really overwhelmed demographically by Asian and African folks, they are neither much metropolitan lefties there nor many EU citizens.. I am sorry just getting frustrated when inherent bias drives an oversimplification of a subject with no results..

Edited August 27, 2019 by Alex Palamas

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

44 minutes ago, Alex Palamas said:

I am sorry just getting frustrated when inherent bias drives an oversimplification of a subject with no results..

Guess what, Alex;  I am an immigrant.  To be precise, an economic immigrant. So shoot me.  How's that for a confession?

[Alex Palamas + 52]

2 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

Guess what, Alex;  I am an immigrant.  To be precise, an economic immigrant. So shoot me.  How's that for a confession?

Excuse me my friend what exactly do u mean here? I think you have entirely missed what I said. Sorry, but pls read carefully what I mean up there..

[Alex Palamas + 52]

10 hours ago, NickW said:

The UK is already the 3rd most densely populated country in Europe (Germany would have to take 40m more people to reach our levels)

And sorry to be pedantic, but the correct maths is that for Germany (233) to achieve the same population density as the UK (267), would need 12mil people not 40.. 

I cannot understand why people do not double-check their facts..

UK 243,610 (km2) x 267 (pueblo/km2) = ~65mil 

Germany 357,021 (km2) x 233 (pueblo/km2) = ~83mil (both figs a tick up at the mom)

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

Just now, Alex Palamas said:

Excuse me my friend what exactly do u mean here? I think you have entirely missed what I said. Sorry, but pls read carefully what I mean up there..

The problem, Alex, is that you are not connecting to either the trend of the thought in the threads, nor really understanding the other posters.  That is leading you into a hostile and defensive posture, where that is not germane.  Try to roll along with what is being said, including being said to you. 

Just for example, my question as to male genital mutilation was strictly rhetorical.  It is undisputed that Jews do the bris as a religious exercise.  Well, if society is going to condone that, then logically society would also condone the head-scarf for Muslim women. That is a strictly academic, intellectual comparison, it has nothing to do with you, except rhetorically.  Now you run off all in a big huff about eating glass before meeting God.  Don't you grasp just what an over-reaction that is? 

Look, this is an international forum, people from different continents arrive here and exchange pleasantries, inside information, tidbits of their local events, analysis especially of oil and factors that influence oil, and the politics that will affect the trade in oil. None of it is personal about  You, and none of it is intended to be personal about You.  Do try to approach the comments with some mellow and see what the various posters are driving at.  Nobody here wishes you ill, so don't look at it that way.  Cheers.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

1 hour ago, Alex Palamas said:

You guys seem really biased, I am sorry. I have said multiple times, I totally get it and agree.. I am happy to even accept what you say about ethnic cleansing, key issue remains, the problem of immigration is heavily blamed on the EU, but you guys opt not to realise that much of it is the doing of your internal system and not the EU..

Because it is easy... Much easier than actually taking responsibillity and trying to better your community / country etc. Blaming scapegoats seems popular these days. 

[Alex Palamas + 52]

9 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

The problem, Alex, is that you are not connecting to either the trend of the thought in the threads, nor really understanding the other posters.  That is leading you into a hostile and defensive posture, where that is not germane.  Try to roll along with what is being said, including being said to you. 

Just for example, my question as to male genital mutilation was strictly rhetorical.  It is undisputed that Jews do the bris as a religious exercise.  Well, if society is going to condone that, then logically society would also condone the head-scarf for Muslim women. That is a strictly academic, intellectual comparison, it has nothing to do with you, except rhetorically.  Now you run off all in a big huff about eating glass before meeting God.  Don't you grasp just what an over-reaction that is? 

Look, this is an international forum, people from different continents arrive here and exchange pleasantries, inside information, tidbits of their local events, analysis especially of oil and factors that influence oil, and the politics that will affect the trade in oil. None of it is personal about  You, and none of it is intended to be personal about You.  Do try to approach the comments with some mellow and see what the various posters are driving at.  Nobody here wishes you ill, so don't look at it that way.  Cheers.

I totally understand, but I feel that you are just blindly antagonising my abrasive approach..  Altho I am sure that your comment will be liked by most here, it is really unnecessary to pick on me in this way.. feels like u run out of steam trying to find how to pinpoint me and I am sure you are v smart but I am not perhaps and fail to see the associations u are trying to make..

I was superbly clear on the religious matter; i gave an example.. 

Anyway, if u read the history of the thread (wont recommend, its boring) u might notice that I like to stick to my opinions however unpopular they might be.. Not looking for cheerleaders, just opinions..

 

Edited August 27, 2019 by Alex Palamas

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

5 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

Do try to approach the comments with some mellow and see what the various posters are driving at.

Jan, 

I am with you on this. However with the caveat that increasingly 

1) facts are not held in high regard

2) the political bias of this forum is becoming even more apparent. The is best illustrated by the fact that few here put in the effort to understand where Alex is coming from. 

I like to discuss and debate. And I am perfectly happy to agree to disagree. and many times I have learned things here. However, increasingly it is my impression that few actually put in effort to understand the other side.... and in that case - what is the point of posting? 

[Alex Palamas + 52]

2 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Jan, 

I am with you on this. However with the caveat that increasingly 

1) facts are not held in high regard

2) the political bias of this forum is becoming even more apparent. The is best illustrated by the fact that few here put in the effort to understand where Alex is coming from. 

I like to discuss and debate. And I am perfectly happy to agree to disagree. and many times I have learned things here. However, increasingly it is my impression that few actually put in effort to understand the other side.... and in that case - what is the point of posting? 

Like every polarised forum, u dare be passionate about an alternative idea, u dare highlight fallacies and limitations and this is what you receive.. Its a disheartening reflection of the political discourse in our societies overall anyway..

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

3 minutes ago, Alex Palamas said:

Altho I am sure that your comment will be liked by most here, it is really unnecessary to pick on me in this way.

I have the impression that this is a bit like the scene in Cool Hand Luke  (an American film).  "What we have is a failure to communicate." 

First, I am not "picking on you."  I have no desire to do so, and I don't pick on anybody, neither here nor anywhere else. We are adults, and this is not Second Grade.  Second, whether my comment is "liked" or "not liked" is both uninteresting and immaterial.  I am addressing you directly, as I get the impression you are new to the forum yet seem to have misinterpreted that this is a forum for frank exchanges of insight, analysis, and opinion. You seem to b e taking that as some sort of personal affront.  I would urge you to avoid doing that. 

8 minutes ago, Alex Palamas said:

feels like u run out of steam trying to find how to pinpoint me

Well, Alex, youa re new here and  nobody really knows much about you. Your name looks vaguely Hispanic but hey it could be Italian for all I know.  Why don't you tell a bit about yourself, where you live, what you do, what your experiences have been in the oil industry, then perhaps we can relate better to your point of view.  Sound reasonable enough? 

[Alex Palamas + 52]

6 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

I am addressing you directly, as I get the impression you are new to the forum yet seem to have misinterpreted that this is a forum for frank exchanges of insight, analysis, and opinion. You seem to b e taking that as some sort of personal affront. 

Jan, this is really incorrect. I understand that u dont have the time to read previous comments (it is a waste of your time) but this is really incorrect.

I have been extremely frank, if not abrasive. My frankness did not seem to go down well.. I have spent time, hard time, explaining as logically and as clearly I can my point of view, even bothered to provide hard facts now and again, nothing crazy just bits.. I have received few (very much appreciated) intelligent antagonistic views but many very superficial crap were thrown back.. I have not been shy, albeit almost giving up to be honest.. 

Edited August 27, 2019 by Alex Palamas

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

4 minutes ago, Alex Palamas said:

Like every polarised forum, u dare be passionate about an alternative idea, u dare highlight fallacies and limitations and this is what you receive.. Its a disheartening reflection of the political discourse in our societies overall anyway..

Well OK, tell you what, maybe the underlying problem is that you have been getting "passionate."  That can be misinterpreted.  Remember you are conversing with folks from other continents with other life experiences.  You do want to make allowances, so I would suggest you proceed cautiously, stick to the facts, make your analysis of the facts, see where it goes.  You would be surprised at just how many really bright guys are here on this forum.  If you do it right, I can assure you that you will learn a lot. 

Yes, there are "Trumpistas," who are blinded by Donald Trump and refuse to see his flaws. And there are Putinistas, who are totally enamored of Putin and refuse to grasp his mindset and make excuses for his evil in Ukraine.  You are going to get that, but you get that when anywhere else, including at lunch and out on the street. So just roll with it, instead of picking fights.  Cheers. Try to stay objective. 

[Alex Palamas + 52]

1 minute ago, Jan van Eck said:

Yes, there are "Trumpistas," who are blinded by Donald Trump and refuse to see his flaws. And there are Putinistas, who are totally enamored of Putin and refuse to grasp his mindset and make excuses for his evil in Ukraine.  You are going to get that, but you get that when anywhere else, including at lunch and out on the street. So just roll with it, instead of picking fights.  Cheers. Try to stay objective. 

Thanx, again, I feel like raising my hand because I have been pedantically and passionately objective and pedantically and passionately factual, given the forum and site of course.. I would be surprised if even the people that mostly disagree with me would disagree with that..

 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

2 minutes ago, Alex Palamas said:

I have been extremely frank, if not abrasive

Yup, tone always influences your reception.

3 minutes ago, Alex Palamas said:

My frankness did not seem to go down well.

That part is now becoming obvious!

4 minutes ago, Alex Palamas said:

but many very superficial crap were thrown back..

OK, this thread is up to eight pages and that is way beyond my attention span at my antique age. I don't even look at pretty girls that long (alas).  Look, a lot of the world is superficial.  Who was the last deep thinker in politics?  I would suggest Pierre Elliott Trudeau of Canada, back around 1968.  He was Minister of Justice and became Prime Minister.  (That is his son who is now the prime minister today). 

The father was called PET.  He went off and married a 20-year-old. Who does that?  Was he nuts?  He was going on fifty.  That was just ridiculous. Was that an exercise in "superficial crap?"  Sure it was.  The point is that even the most cerebral, the most brilliant, can (and do) do totally ridiculous things.  

So, moral here:  don't let the "superficial crap" being thrown at you for unpopular idea get you down.  Just move on, you cannot beat every thread to death, this forum does not work that way.  Remember: there are lots and lots of accomplished, really smart guys on this Forum .  Interact with them and enjoy the fruits of the interactions.  Cheers.