welovesundaysatspace

32 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

funny,

that people think May resigning will improve things

 

 

Also funny that Brexiteers finally seem to admit that people can change their mind and want a democratic decision to be revisited. 

30 minutes ago, vogie said:

Nigel Farage is due to appear on the Andrew Marr shortly, if you hurry you might just catch him.

Thanks, but I don’t watch the likes of Farage, Trump and Co. 

30 minutes ago, vogie said:

There also may be some tickets left for the Brexit Rally at Merthyr Tydfil. Thank me later.????

Given the success of his Sunderland march I assume there must be more than some tickets left. 

13 minutes ago, vogie said:

No I didn't mean that, you have added your own words.

I think there is a video of his performance where he said this (or something similar). Not my words. 

13 minutes ago, vogie said:

But it is good you are worried about Nigel Farage,

Quite the opposite, see my comment. He can’t make much more noise than taking the mic and making everyone yawn. 

2 hours ago, vogie said:

How can it not help Brexit, if Nigel Farage and the rest of his contingent make enough noise in Brussels, do you think that the EU would be willing to extend any further extensions, I think they would say "aurevoir"

You mean like last time when he begged in parliament to “please, Mr Tusk, kick us out”?

4 minutes ago, Orton Rd said:

Being poor and from a hell hole are not grounds for 'asylum'.

Any suggestions for them? 

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Totally incorrect. We could have left unilaterally on WTO terms on 29 March. We didn't need the EU's agreement for that, it was already in article 50. Only a deal required the EU's agreement and a deal was absolutely not a prerequisite of leaving.

Yes, you could have left. But you didn’t leave. You claimed the latter. That’s all I disputed. 

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Yes I do believe Brexit will happen. The relationship has soured so badly that there is no choice but to leave.  Even the more intelligent Remainers have finally seen how the EU cartel operates and their plans for further integration into a EU superstate complete with a European Army. If article 50 is revoked then the Brexit Party will win by a landslide at the next GE and trigger it again. It would go round in circles and the EU know it.

Wishful thinking, but I guess we will have to wait and see. 

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

The EU are playing their final hand hoping Parliament agrees to May's treaty. That is the EU's last chance as they'd use it to lock us in via the backstop (which is why they refuse to remove it). Parliament will not agree to that surrender document and we'll leave with no deal, maybe in October, maybe 2020, maybe in 3 years. It will happen. Stamp it.  

Again, wishful thinking. Parliament will never agree on a no-deal Brexit. You will never find enough people to vote in a no-deal parliament. The opposite will happen, the longer this takes, the less support there will be for Brexit. 

54 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Parliament enacted article 50, meaning we left on 29 March with or without a deal. 

No, it doesn’t mean that you left. Your EU membership is a bilateral agreement in international law. It cannot be terminated or changed unilaterally through UK law. That would totally defeat the purpose of such contract. 

Quote

Parliament subsequently conniving to stop Brexit will fail.

Parliament is sovereign. If parliament wants to stop Brexit, I’m afraid it won’t fail. 

Quote

They will pay for their duplicity with their seats, and some of them with their careers.

It the electorate wants that, sure. 

Quote

This is just another temporary delay which harms the country. Brexit will happen whether it's this year or in 3 years.  There is no way back from this, it's gone too far and it must and will happen. Democracy will prevail. The sooner Remainiacs accept it, the better for everyone.

Keep telling yourself that, but do you actually believe it? 

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

 

I didn't claim "some" EU politician was unelected (I assume that you mean Verhofstadt).

And I wasn’t replying to you (but the guy who posted that meme about Verhofstadt). 

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

But I will claim that the most powerful EU politicians are selected, rather than elected in any meaningful and democratic way.

Selecting people for certain positions by elected bodies is pretty democratic and happens in countries. 

11 minutes ago, Wullie Mercer said:

How did parliament get to change the wish of the people to leave the EU, deal was a after thought that has left them with shit on their faces.

Parliament doesn’t change the wish of the people. Parliament just makes decisions. Not all people like those decisions and might wish differently. That’s how things work and always have. 

6 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Like I said, the UK has a constitutional monarchy, that is the way it is and will remain until such time as the people may want to change that arrangement. There is neither need nor point to compare Her Majesty with EU politicians, whether they be elected or not.

When the most powerful individual in your country, the head of state and commander-in-chief is unelected, you shouldn’t be surprised people rub it in your face everytime you falsely claim some EU politician is “unelected”. What goes around comes around. And giving it a name (“constitutional monarchy”) just admits the whole hypocrisy. 

53 minutes ago, fvw53 said:

Why need proof if Trump himself admitted the losses...and called it a "sport"

Because Trump is a pathological liar that cannot be trusted; even in this tweet he goes from “no problem because everyone did it” in the first sentence to “Fake News” in the next one. 

32 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Maybe you can explain the following:

I know Thais use goo and mueng when they insult each other.

And I know it should never be used with strangers if you don't want to upset them.

But I heard friends (two girls in an office) use those words while friendly talking to each other.

I asked my Thai gf about this and she confirmed that friends use it with each other. Strange - at least for me.

Do you have some insight into this or a similar English example?

Thanks

I don’t have an English example. Like I said, I think it’s one of the words that don’t have a direct translation in English. It’s true that close friends us with each other. You wouldn’t use it with your girlfriend/spouse/wife though. I think the best comparison would be how you may call your buddies jokingly “you f***er” or something but never your girlfriend. 

So, I think using “bloody” here just to convey the tone and that he is not just asking in factual way whether she will wai him but actually in an insulting and hostile way is fair enough. I wouldn’t know how to do it better. 

17 minutes ago, nauseus said:

EU politicians are nothing to do with the Queen. 

Yes, because they are elected, unlike your own head of state and commander-in-chief. But keep lying about “unelected” EU politicians. 

6 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

This old tax revelation means absolutely nothing. 

Besides, the years in question are when NYC real estate values went into the dumper. 

Someone claimed that “it has been shown he did not avoid taxes”; where is the proof for that? 

10 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

No, that is an impolite way to say "I" or "me".

But it seems friends also use that word with each other. It's difficult...

Since the meaning of กู cannot be directly translated into English, I think it’s fair to use something like “bloody” here so the tone of the statement gets conveyed. He isn’t just saying “will you ไหว้ me”; using กู with his girlfriend he is clearly saying it in a hostile way. 

4 minutes ago, nontabury said:

 

 

You must be another non Brit on these Brexit threads, otherwise you would know that the Queen does not make political speeches to the British people, with the exception of the queens speech, which is actually written by the government in power,and therefore she does not influence our political thoughts.  And as regarding Brexit, I and everyone else, have no idea, as to which side of the argument she favours.

Your head of state and commander-in-chief is unelected. But keep calling elected EU politicians “unelected”. 

We need to get rid of all those unelected lot