Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Alf Bentley]

16 minutes ago, KingGTF said:

 

Normally I'd ignore this, at the end of the day it's absolutely no skin off my nose if your opinions change or you fundamentally disagree. But, admittedly, on this occasion I could not quite feel the apathy. Maybe you see it as a steaming turd and patriotic scoundrel but it isn't without reason. And anyway you're wrong just given that I have to read absolute shit like

 

Or Sharpe's barely comprehensible keyboard murmurings, or repeated calls of the government being scum, or anything Buce says in here (one my favourite posters elsewhere though), or two people posting essentially the same graph to argue with each other. 

 

In the land of Corbyn and his cronies, Britain is almost always wrong. Certainly seems to have sided with every enemy of the British state. 

 

He has been critical of all Britain's actions since WW2, including in the Cold War. He has advocated the abolition of NATO, or at least pulling back from the Baltic border. Let's ask the people of the Baltic nations what they think of that? He has employed a man to be his advisor who thinks it a shame the Berlin Wall fell, has hosted Putin propanda, and blames the West for Ukraine. His shadow chancellor admits to being a Trotskyist... well actually his shadow chancellor's record is a whole other post.

 

We were wrong with the Falklands War and he has advocated joint ownership with Argentina (eventual surrender?) despite pretty much everyone there saying they would like to keep it as it is. He wants to completely ignore the will of the Falklands' people.

 

When asked by Andrew Neil about Seamus Mallon's comments on Corbyn taking the IRA's side, his answer was not to deny it, he simply said Mallon hadn't told him that personally. He voted against the Anglo-Irish Agreement and I'm yet to see an actual reason why he decided to align himself with Sinn Fein. In fact all his behaviour was quite questionable. Again his appointed shadow chancellor opposed the peace process until the late 90s. Still, I know you don't like him being linked to the IRA so I'll leave that though one might suggest reading the transript of his interview with Stephen Nolan, 

 

The man called Hezbollah and Hamas friends, campaigning for the latter to be removed as a terrorist group and insisting that it is committed “long term peace and social justice”. We won't talk about the anti-semitism he allows within his party.

 

His appearances on Iranian State TV - banned by the UK - are questionable as well. Corbyn was happy to personally take money off a regime with questionable human rights record whilst also aiding their propaganda campaign. He once praised the Iranian regime for "inclusivity and tolerance". A quote from an Iranian democracy campaigner, "People who present programmes for Press TV and get paid for it should be really ashamed of themselves — especially if they call themselves liberals and people who are interested in human rights." (I expect Saudi Arabia to be mentioned at least 3000 times now)

 

He labels Blair a war criminal but opposed NATO action against Milosevic (an actual fully fledged war criminal), even denying some of his actions against Kosovo.

 

Let us not forget his praise for Chavez in Venuzuela, Castro in Cuba, or his regular appearances on Russian propaganda networks. Or the fact the former leader of MI6 called him unfit to lead the country and he wouldn't clear security vetting. Not too dissimilar to comments from CIA agents about Trump who, judging by your post, you see as a danger. 

 

I mean I can move away from that and think why his interest in the people, rather than country, is also questionable.

 

Look at the fact he is advocating policies that they now freely admit will lead to a run on the pound. How it is deemed acceptable to admit this would be the result of your policies is phenomenal. It's made all the more incredible by Trump-like comments to defend it. Next, he'll have to admit to the scale of capital flight and the crash in any sterling denominated asset. And then admit they can't fund anything without printing money because no sane investor will want to lend to his government. And to think TB thinks real wages are problem now. 

 

Maybe look at his desire to remove people's freedoms. His war on consumers. Maybe I might even point out (to a remainer) his efforts to sabotage the Remain campaign or his Hokey Cokey Brexit policy. 

 

So I am not sorry for my patriotic scoundrel, I just really don't think precedent suggests Corbyn has anything near Britain's best interests at heart. In fact, right now, I suspect he is only interested in the interests of the few in his Marxist coalition. You're right he won't be a puppet of the EU but he will do them more good than he will do us. Finally, suggesting my comment is akin to that of a fascist and opponent of democracy whilst appearing to defend a man with heavy communist links is almost quite amusing. 

 

 

I won't get into an extended dialogue as I've made my point and most of your post is attacking Corbyn (about whom I have distinctly mixed feelings) or other posters.

 

Briefly:

- I don't know who posted the quote you inserted about creating money, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't me (correct me if I'm wrong)

- Sharpe's Fox, Buce and others can answer for themselves, but I don't understand why you're quoting them at me (because they're vaguely left not right, like me?). I sometimes agree with them, sometimes disagree. They both come across to me as likeable chaps and - most relevantly - I get the impression that some of their posts are a bit tongue-in-cheek or intended as friendly partisan wind-ups (particularly Sharpe's)

- You give a long, apparently very angry list of Corbyn's failings. I agree with many of your criticisms of him, though others are distorted or exaggerated. I've no love for the Hard Left with its sanctimonious ticking-off of right-on causes / purist positions. Again, though, I'm not sure why you're going on to me about Corbyn as I'm certainly not uncritical of him myself. I'm broadly a sceptical Labour supporter, but more pragmatic, reformist Soft Left than Corbynista. I voted for Owen Smith in the second leadership contest and was never a Hard Left man back when I was active in the party (80s/90s)

- Back when the IRA was active, as an Anglo-Irish person myself I had no time for the IRA and once nearly got in a punch-up when an Anglo-Irish friend suggested that to claim any loyalty to Ireland (which I didn't want to do anyway) I should support the Warrington bombing, which had killed two young boys. Likewise, I had no time for the Hard Left stance of just calling for a united Ireland and Troops Out. It was obvious that peace would only come about through difficult compromise on all sides, so that both Nationalists/Republicans and Unionists/Loyalists felt their interests were protected and that there was hope for the future. Criticising Corbyn for supporting Republicanism, allying with Sinn Fein or meeting questionable individuals is fair comment that I'd agree with - but accusing him of "taking the IRA's side" is cheap and inaccurate, unless you have evidence of him calling on people to support the IRA. Did Thatcher take the side of mass-murdering fascists in Chile by meeting Pinochet? I'd criticise Thatcher for allying with Pinochet but would consider that to be hyperbole. I'd accept that Corbyn should have cared more about IRA atrocities - as Thatcher should have cared more about Pinochet's. 

 

In all seriousness, would you think it reasonable if I accused Theresa May of having "always wanted to sabotage Britain" or seeking to be Trump's "puppet of divide and rule"?! Corbyn has a different vision for Britain, one that you don't like and one that I have mixed feelings about, but that doesn't make him a traitorous saboteur!

 

Maybe I'm misinterpreting you, but the tone of your reply seems very stressed out. I've occasionally got over-stressed on here myself, out of a combination of real life and online argument. If so, it's sometimes better to take a break from political argument.

Sorry if that sounds patronising. It's meant to be helpful, based on experience of my own failings. 

[Guest Kopfkino]

@Alf Bentley I appreciate your concern for my welfare but it's actually quite the opposite right now. I'm as relaxed and content as is plausible at the moment. Possibly too relaxed.

 

I was just riled by the holier than thou post. So I pointed out the 'steamy turds' that grace this place so often. I forgot to add the fact it's turned into an extension of the Guardian's marketing department. I actually couldn't care less what gets posted, unless it's factually incorrect, and I at least get a chuckle out of Sharpe's.

 

I then listed reasons why my 'patriotic scoundrel' that Corbyn seeks to sabotage Britain was in fact informed by precedent. It's nothing personal with you and Corbyn beyond your initial criticism.

 

Anyway I am logging off now for a while. Plenty of work to do, reports to write, job applications to make, and essays to thrash out.

[Carl the Llama]

29 minutes ago, KingGTF said:

@Alf Bentley I appreciate your concern for my welfare but it's actually quite the opposite right now. I'm as relaxed and content as is plausible at the moment. Possibly too relaxed.

 

I was just riled by the holier than thou post. So I pointed out the 'steamy turds' that grace this place so often. I forgot to add the fact it's turned into an extension of the Guardian's marketing department. I actually couldn't care less what gets posted, unless it's factually incorrect, and I at least get a chuckle out of Sharpe's.

 

I then listed reasons why my 'patriotic scoundrel' that Corbyn seeks to sabotage Britain was in fact informed by precedent. It's nothing personal with you and Corbyn beyond your initial criticism.

 

Anyway I am logging off now for a while. Plenty of work to do, reports to write, job applications to make, and essays to thrash out.

If I may interject here: 2 wrongs don't make a right and saying "but they did it" is rarely a justification of one's own behaviour.  Also scoundrel is not a verb.

 

I'd give you the Guardian point but my view is that rather than being a lefty dominated board promoting left-leaning press wherever possible it's really just a couple of prolific posters and I suspect they do it to deliberately annoy at least some of the time.  Right-wing members seem to be quite paranoid about their representation on here at times but from where I'm standing the board certainly doesn't appear to be a lefty stomping ground.  If you did a poll today asking whether we view ourselves as 'left' or 'right' I'd wager the result to be anywhere from a 45:55 to a 35:65 split. And I'm fine with that (obviously, otherwise I wouldn't be posting on here I'd be sulking in some bias-affirming echo chamber).

Edited 19 October 2017 by Carl the Llama

[Buce]

2 hours ago, KingGTF said:

 

Normally I'd ignore this, at the end of the day it's absolutely no skin off my nose if your opinions change or you fundamentally disagree. But, admittedly, on this occasion I could not quite feel the apathy. Maybe you see it as a steaming turd and patriotic scoundrel but it isn't without reason. And anyway you're wrong just given that I have to read absolute shit like

 

Or Sharpe's barely comprehensible keyboard murmurings, or repeated calls of the government being scum, or anything Buce says in here (one my favourite posters elsewhere though), or two people posting essentially the same graph to argue with each other. 

 

In the land of Corbyn and his cronies, Britain is almost always wrong. Certainly seems to have sided with every enemy of the British state. 

 

He has been critical of all Britain's actions since WW2, including in the Cold War. He has advocated the abolition of NATO, or at least pulling back from the Baltic border. Let's ask the people of the Baltic nations what they think of that? He has employed a man to be his advisor who thinks it a shame the Berlin Wall fell, has hosted Putin propanda, and blames the West for Ukraine. His shadow chancellor admits to being a Trotskyist... well actually his shadow chancellor's record is a whole other post.

 

We were wrong with the Falklands War and he has advocated joint ownership with Argentina (eventual surrender?) despite pretty much everyone there saying they would like to keep it as it is. He wants to completely ignore the will of the Falklands' people.

 

When asked by Andrew Neil about Seamus Mallon's comments on Corbyn taking the IRA's side, his answer was not to deny it, he simply said Mallon hadn't told him that personally. He voted against the Anglo-Irish Agreement and I'm yet to see an actual reason why he decided to align himself with Sinn Fein. In fact all his behaviour was quite questionable. Again his appointed shadow chancellor opposed the peace process until the late 90s. Still, I know you don't like him being linked to the IRA so I'll leave that though one might suggest reading the transript of his interview with Stephen Nolan, 

 

The man called Hezbollah and Hamas friends, campaigning for the latter to be removed as a terrorist group and insisting that it is committed “long term peace and social justice”. We won't talk about the anti-semitism he allows within his party.

 

His appearances on Iranian State TV - banned by the UK - are questionable as well. Corbyn was happy to personally take money off a regime with questionable human rights record whilst also aiding their propaganda campaign. He once praised the Iranian regime for "inclusivity and tolerance". A quote from an Iranian democracy campaigner, "People who present programmes for Press TV and get paid for it should be really ashamed of themselves — especially if they call themselves liberals and people who are interested in human rights." (I expect Saudi Arabia to be mentioned at least 3000 times now)

 

He labels Blair a war criminal but opposed NATO action against Milosevic (an actual fully fledged war criminal), even denying some of his actions against Kosovo.

 

Let us not forget his praise for Chavez in Venuzuela, Castro in Cuba, or his regular appearances on Russian propaganda networks. Or the fact the former leader of MI6 called him unfit to lead the country and he wouldn't clear security vetting. Not too dissimilar to comments from CIA agents about Trump who, judging by your post, you see as a danger. 

 

I mean I can move away from that and think why his interest in the people, rather than country, is also questionable.

 

Look at the fact he is advocating policies that they now freely admit will lead to a run on the pound. How it is deemed acceptable to admit this would be the result of your policies is phenomenal. It's made all the more incredible by Trump-like comments to defend it. Next, he'll have to admit to the scale of capital flight and the crash in any sterling denominated asset. And then admit they can't fund anything without printing money because no sane investor will want to lend to his government. And to think TB thinks real wages are problem now. 

 

Maybe look at his desire to remove people's freedoms. His war on consumers. Maybe I might even point out (to a remainer) his efforts to sabotage the Remain campaign or his Hokey Cokey Brexit policy. 

 

So I am not sorry for my patriotic scoundrel, I just really don't think precedent suggests Corbyn has anything near Britain's best interests at heart. In fact, right now, I suspect he is only interested in the interests of the few in his Marxist coalition. You're right he won't be a puppet of the EU but he will do them more good than he will do us. Finally, suggesting my comment is akin to that of a fascist and opponent of democracy whilst appearing to defend a man with heavy communist links is almost quite amusing. 

 

 

The Political threads are the most polarised on here, and bring out the worst in us.

 

Yourself included, it seems.

[Alf Bentley]

50 minutes ago, KingGTF said:

@Alf Bentley I appreciate your concern for my welfare but it's actually quite the opposite right now. I'm as relaxed and content as is plausible at the moment. Possibly too relaxed.

 

I was just riled by the holier than thou post. So I pointed out the 'steamy turds' that grace this place so often. I forgot to add the fact it's turned into an extension of the Guardian's marketing department. I actually couldn't care less what gets posted, unless it's factually incorrect, and I at least get a chuckle out of Sharpe's.

 

I then listed reasons why my 'patriotic scoundrel' that Corbyn seeks to sabotage Britain was in fact informed by precedent. It's nothing personal with you and Corbyn beyond your initial criticism.

 

Anyway I am logging off now for a while. Plenty of work to do, reports to write, job applications to make, and essays to thrash out.

 

Glad to hear that you're relaxed and content. I'll leave it there as I've said anything I had to say.

Good luck with all the paperwork.

[fuchsntf]

6 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

 

Rarely have two such massive steaming turds been deposited in this forum in such quick succession - and by two posters capable of so much better.

 

So Corbyn is saying that he'll pay 100 billion, take any trade offer, any border, is he? What is the source for your information, @MattP, apart from the deep recesses of your rectum?!

That's certainly not what he or Starmer have been saying in public. Indeed, many - including you - have previously expressed the (justified) view that Corbyn is quite Eurosceptic.

Labour has certainly been expressing the view that no deal is a very bad outcome. As a middle-sized nation, choosing to isolate yourself in the world, at the mercy of Trump, Putin & the Chinese Communist Party seems a pretty bad outcome to me.

Likewise, opting to make your nation's businesses markedly less competitive in almost 50% of their trading markets - all in the hope of great but as yet non-existent trade deals with nations on the other side of the globe that are licking their lips at the prospects of forcing their terms on us. Throw in the risk of restarting violent conflict over N. Ireland, and that seems a pretty bad deal to me. Doubtless a worse deal is possible, but it would be hard to imagine one.

 

As for @KingGTF, I previously had you down as an intelligent poster with well-informed opinions, even if I disagreed with some of them. Yet here you are resorting to the patriotic scoundrel routine.

Accusing someone you disagree with of seeking to "sabotage Britain" and being ready to be the "puppet" of foreign powers seeking to divide and rule is the sort of insane rhetoric you normally hear only from bonehead fascists or opponents of democracy.

 

Referring to "divide and rule" is massively ironic as we currently have a government (not an opposition, an actual government, responsible for running the country) that seems incapable of ruling precisely because it is massively divided.

Does anyone seriously know what the Tory strategy is on Brexit? As far as I can tell, May's strategy is to straddle the fence in a futile attempt to hold her divided party together....while the clock ticks down on Brexit. She is risking this nation's future safety and prosperity by dithering to try to keep both wings of her party happy so that she can remain in government - yet she'll have to jump off the fence at some point. She'll have to either side with the Brexit headbangers who think they can call the EU's bluff, withdraw and either the EU will come begging with its tail between its legs or people like Trump, Putin and Xi will be offering Brit-friendly future deals - or she'll have to engage properly in the negotiations and make provisional compromises on the initial issues so that we can move on to consider future arrangements beneficial to both sides.

 

Despite our disagreements, you two are capable of arguments so much better than these. Next time you produce a big steaming shit, please flush it down the bog rather than stinking out the forum.

No offence intended, lads. Some people talk shite all the time and are rightly ignored. That doesn't apply to you, so it's frustrating when you spout such groundless garbage.

Alf you aint a Bently..but a wonderful smooth silver shadow Rolls-Royce...

[fuchsntf]

Just to keep you all happy..

 

Either by Xmas, or next March...I will become  a relaxed German.

 

I told my german friends, I am only doing it, to know what it feels like being a"Weltmeister", plus its better to take

money off the Germans for my Pension, the poor  British might not pay up, they aint got too much in the bank...

ahhh .  Gud ol' ..Einigkeit und Recht und freiheit,

and Joachim Löw...

Brexit...dont make me laugh...

[bovril]

3 hours ago, KingGTF said:

 

Or Sharpe's barely comprehensible keyboard murmurings, or repeated calls of the government being scum, or anything Buce says in here (one my favourite posters elsewhere though), or two people posting essentially the same graph to argue with each other. 

Or maybe they just don't take foxestalk (or themselves) quite as seriously as you evidently do.

[Alf Bentley]

13 minutes ago, fuchsntf said:

Just to keep you all happy..

 

Either by Xmas, or next March...I will become  a relaxed German.

 

I told my german friends, I am only doing it, to know what it feels like being a"Weltmeister"

 

Your train awaits, Mein Herr...

 

[fuchsntf]

7 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Your train awaits, Mein Herr...

 

I am chuffed..chuff, chuff

[Alf Bentley]

4 minutes ago, fuchsntf said:

I am chuffed..chuff, chuff

 

An odd story behind that photo.

 

I was over in Germany for the 2006 World Cup and was on Cologne station at about midnight when that train ghosted inexplicably into the station....

 

Note whose face is directly above it, too, just a few weeks before he found infamy in the final....

Edited 19 October 2017 by Alf Bentley

[Guest Kopfkino]

24 minutes ago, bovril said:

Or maybe they just don't take foxestalk (or themselves) quite as seriously as you evidently do.

 

Evidently.

[ajthefox]

7 hours ago, MattP said:

Well that makes it OK then.

 Clearly not what I said, just pointing out Corbyn isn't the only person who has said it.

If you have then forgive me, but I haven't seen you making such a fuss about her saying it. I would argue it is worse that the home secretary has said it than the leader of the opposition, but that is obviously subjective.

[fuchsntf]

17 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

An odd story behind that photo.

 

I was over in Germany for the 2006 World Cup and was on Cologne station at about midnight when that train ghosted inexplicably into the station....

 

Note whose face is directly above it, too, just a few weeks before he found infamy in the final....

Ghosted probably right, it was a spiritual trip on that Train  to remember, That 1st triumph and Players against the still great Hungarians,

Hence the Wunder von Bern, just over 50yrs of passing, at the time.

 

German success since that period , just shows how poor we have been, in organising our talent, on finding some level of Success.

Mind you, I do tell them We let them win the peace, but we are still in front 2-0 when it gets serious.

Plus after winning it once, we dont need to Keep proving ourselves, we aint that greedy, let others have a go...

 

[Guest MattP]

http://www.politico.eu/article/merkel-has-no-doubt-eu-and-uk-can-clinch-brexit-deal/

 

Merkel has no doubt we can do a deal and even hints at compromise.

 

As I've said before, don't believe a word you hear from organisations like The Guardian or the BBC.

[Bellend Sebastian]

22 minutes ago, MattP said:

http://www.politico.eu/article/merkel-has-no-doubt-eu-and-uk-can-clinch-brexit-deal/

 

Merkel has no doubt we can do a deal and even hints at compromise.

 

As I've said before, don't believe a word you hear from organisations like The Guardian or the BBC.

This story was in The Guardian this morning.

 

Now I really am confused

[Innovindil]

7 minutes ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

This story was in The Guardian this morning.

 

Now I really am confused

Even a blind squirrel occasionally finds a nut. 

[katieakita]

25 minutes ago, MattP said:

http://www.politico.eu/article/merkel-has-no-doubt-eu-and-uk-can-clinch-brexit-deal/

 

Merkel has no doubt we can do a deal and even hints at compromise.

 

As I've said before, don't believe a word you hear from organisations like The Guardian or the BBC.

Or some political parties and most newspapers tbf you will get more truth in Private Eye.

[Fox Ulike]

40 minutes ago, MattP said:

http://www.politico.eu/article/merkel-has-no-doubt-eu-and-uk-can-clinch-brexit-deal/

 

Merkel has no doubt we can do a deal and even hints at compromise.

 

As I've said before, don't believe a word you hear from organisations like The Guardian or the BBC.

Good news. (Which is the lead story in the Guardian!)

 

Bit embarrassing though that it's Merkel not May taking the initiative to sort this out for us!

[Bellend Sebastian]

1 hour ago, Fox Ulike said:

Good news. (Which is the lead story in the Guardian!)

 

Bit embarrassing though that it's Merkel not May taking the initiative to sort this out for us!

Some of these European leaders seem very sensible to me. If only there were some way of forging closer ties with them, perhaps by being part of some economic and political union with other European states.

 

You may say I'm a dreamer, etc

[Fox Ulike]

24 minutes ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

Some of these European leaders seem very sensible to me. If only there were some way of forging closer ties with them, perhaps by being part of some economic and political union with other European states.

 

You may say I'm a dreamer, etc

 

You mean…. some sort of “Union” or something with Europe?

 

I don’t know about that. It would be onions for breakfast and Christmas would be banned.

 

Sounds awful.

[Bellend Sebastian]

58 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

 

You mean…. some sort of “Union” or something with Europe?

 

I don’t know about that. It would be onions for breakfast and Christmas would be banned.

 

Sounds awful.

And you wouldn't be able to call sausages 'sausages' anymore

[Alf Bentley]

8 minutes ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

And you wouldn't be able to call sausages 'sausages' anymore

 

That would be the wurst outcome imaginable.

 

Say it loud and say it proud: "Ich bin ein Frankfurter Cumberlander"

[Guest]

And here's why Merkel is confident PMSL. Why the **** have we waited months to do this?

 

Theresa May has said the UK is examining “line by line” how much it will pay the EU when it leaves the union, which may involve handing over many more billions than the €20bn (£17.9bn) of budget contributions promised so far.

Speaking on Friday, the prime minister did not deny that she had told EU leaders on Thursday night that her Florence speech was “not the final word” on what Britain was willing to pay as a financial settlement for Brexit.

Asked whether it was conceivable that the total bill could reach €60bn, as demanded by the EU, she did not dismiss the sum out of hand, unlike Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, who has said Brussels can “go whistle” for such an amount.

“I’ve been very clear on where we are in relation to the financial settlement,” she said. “I’ve set out the reassurance to our European colleagues and we will go through that line by line in relation to the commitments that we’ve made in our membership.

“And I’ve also said in the past, if there are particular programmes where we wish to continue to be a member then of course we would look at paying relevant costs in relation to that, programmes such as science and research, and perhaps some of the justice issues.”

In her Florence speech, May promised to pay into the EU budget until 2021, at a cost of €20bn, but did not put a price tag on honouring further financial obligations or specify what these would be.

Speaking in Brussels on the last day of the EU summit, she said: “What I’ve made clear in relation to financial contributions is what I set out in my Florence speech. What I’ve said is that [no EU member state] need be concerned about the current budget plan that they will have to pay for or receive less as a result of the UK leaving, and we will honour the commitments we have made during our membership. 

“As for the detailed work on those commitments, as David Davis has said, we are going through them line by line and we will continue to go through them line by line. The British taxpayer wouldn’t expect the government to do anything else.”

There are growing suspicions that No 10 will avoid putting a hard figure on how much it will end up paying the EU, although May said the amount would be clear when a final deal was struck at the end of negotiations.

Her remarks came as EU leaders decided that they would not open trade talks with the UK yet, but were prepared to talk about the issue among themselves.

It took the 27 EU leaders just 90 seconds to agree on a statement in which they ruled that insufficient progress had been made over the three key withdrawal issues: citizens’ rights, the Irish border and the financial settlement.

[Fox Ulike]

54 minutes ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

And you wouldn't be able to call sausages 'sausages' anymore

 

I know. It's awful. All 'Bratwurst' will be required by EU law to contain exactly 63% halal meat, so that they don't offend the Muslimists.