RayC

"On 29 January 2025, Russia warned the Armenian government of severe economic consequences if it pursued plans to move towards membership of the European Union". Yet more evidence to debunk the idea that Russia is not an aggressor.

Not sure why you felt the need to include this paragraph, Jonny? I have stated (more than once) that imo the Labour government has proved to be a disappointment (to date), and that I oppose some of its' policies e.g. the increase in employer national insurance. I assume that you must think the blessed Nigel to be perfect as your devotion, and complete absence of any criticism of him, takes fandom to a whole new level. So only the right-wing get to define what it is be patriotic and have a monopoly on it? No that's not how it works.

Are these 'Real Brits' the ones who love their country so much that they never miss an opportunity to criticise it and vow never to return to live in it?

I'm afraid that, once again, your irrational hatred of the EU has distorted fact and resulted in erroneous conclusions. Pre Trump's tariff tantrum, the EU and US traded under the internationally accepted WTO rules based system, mostly on a 'Most favoured nation' type arrangement. This resulted in a tariff rate on most of each other's exports of +/-1%. In this context, Trump's offer of 10% tariffs on EU exports to the US can therefore be seen for what it is: Anything but generous. Yes, it's most likely that the EU do want to export to the US with 'carefree abandon'; however, the EU would be perfectly happy for the US to engage in similar behaviour when exporting to the EU. That's why both parties spent much of the last decade trying to negotiate a comprehensive free trade agreement (TTIP). Unfortunately someone pulled the plug on the negotiations in, I think, 2018. Who was that someone? That's right, one Donald J. Trump. Your conclusion is therefore partially correct. There is protectionism at work, however, it's not from the EU side.

I can only conclude from this that exchanges are now to be conducted using the Royal 'We'. So with that in mind, 'We' do not love Trump. 'We' do not want our very own Trump. 'We' would very much appreciate it if our American friends could take Farage off of our hands.

Chelsea will have an open-topped bus parade in West London sometime soon. Will President Trump join them?

Sad how some Brexiters falsify facts and distort reality. Flawed as it is, the EU - UK Withdrawal Agreement at least ensures that there are no tariffs on trade between the EU and the UK. The non-tariff barriers faced by UK exporters and importers - such as the increased bureaucracy, increased difficulty in hiring EU nationals, etc. - are self-imposed and the result of a choice made by Johnson's UK government to remove the UK from the Single Market and the Customs Union. The offer of continued membership of the both was made by the EU but rejected by the UK. The US has applied tariffs on (almost) all of its' trading partners, risking a global slowdown, crisis in the financial markets and a realignment in the world order so bears no resemblance to the EU. Ah, the reappearance of one of the 'hard' Brexiters' favourite mantras: 'It will hurt them more than it hurts us'. Of course, this ignores the fact that the hurt could be avoided completely.

My apologies. There was me thinking it was sarcasm.

Sorry. Can't view that. Not on Facebook.

For the umpteenth time, complete and utter nonsense. It certainly is a load of crap, Barra. You restate that most of the illegal immigrants are young men of fighting age. And? You consider that to be sufficient proof that they are about to cause havoc on the streets of the UK? Numbers of refugees? In the year to September 2024, 62,089 people were granted refugee status in the UK. As for deflection or whataboutism, more absolute nonsense. I've addressed your questions head on. The fact is you don't like my responses.

What's your point?

Well you certainly haven't posted anything that could be considered remotely positive about immigrants. You say that they are all young men of fighting age. What message are you trying to convey by that? I don't doubt that many (most?) of these illegal immigrants are economic migrants and they should be dealt with accordingly. However, some are fleeing persecution and should be treated as refugees. If you were a homosexual or a political dissident in Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, etc wouldn't you flee to save your life?

Good so you admit that not all immigrants are wrong 'uns. Not sure how I could have reached that conclusion given that every one of your posts either paints immigrants in a negative light or suggests that the native population are being victimised.

You're right, I wouldn't; who in their right mind would? But then not every immigrant - legal or illegal - is a sex offender.

Deleted. Duplicate post.

You're right; these protests are uncoordinated and not simultaneous and, therefore, individually they are not worthy of nationwide coverage. I don't doubt that illegal migration is a national concern. What I reject is the idea that the national media is not giving it sufficient coverage. The link to the BBC documentary about the subject proves that.

When the protests happened nationwide this time last year, they were headline news across the media, including the BBC 6 o'clock and 10 o'clock news bulletins. An isolated local protest in Epping - which is what the OP posted - is just that: a local protest.

Yes, completely undemocratic. Just as it was in 2019 when the Conservatives had an 80-seat majority after winning only 43% of the vote.

I'm sure they are. It's called local news.

That is probably because most of these protests are local and not considered sufficiently newsworthy to be broadcast nationally but you probably know that.

And you think that this sort of thing is sufficiently important and newsworthy to be covered in the main news bulletins?

Introducing any type of PR system is welcome although, unfortunately, I doubt that it will be extended to General Elections.

Once again, complete and utter nonsense

Legal immigration to the UK has increased since Brexit. EU law allows member states to refuse entry to individuals who pose a threat to public order, security, or public health. Not sure if you mean the International Court of Justice (ICJ) which is based in the Hague or the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg? In any event, it's irrelevant as both are completely separate entities to the EU

Complete and utter nonsense https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c87pqnn803yo.amp