Farage says Brexit will be delayed again when PM Johnson's deal falls

[nauseus]

2 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

Yes to leave with a deal which keeps us in the single market.

Its only after leave won that the goalposts got moved to become no deal Brexit.

No deal Brexit is unworkable for many reason not least of which is the Irish border.

Oddly enough if we remain in the single market the Irish border is not an issue.

ha ha

[Rookiescot]

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

ha ha

Thats it?

[beautifulthailand99]

I'm in where do we join ?

[beautifulthailand99]

4 hours ago, nauseus said:

Except that remainers want to overturn the democratic vote of 2016. Right?

Err your last hero BoJo's gonna do that with his warmed dog's dinner WA2 if he can pull it off which is is a fully fledged Olly Johnson Brino for which he is expecting great acclaim. The WA is a great template for re-joining down the line once all this Brexitness madness ends once and for all. P.S Everyman and his dog now KNOWS NO DEAL just ain't happening. Sorry about that if it rocked your boat. 

[nauseus]

33 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

Thats it?

ha

[nauseus]

2 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Err your last hero BoJo's gonna do that with his warmed dog's dinner WA2 if he can pull it off which is is a fully fledged Olly Johnson Brino for which he is expecting great acclaim. The WA is a great template for re-joining down the line once all this Brexitness madness ends once and for all. P.S Everyman and his dog now KNOWS NO DEAL just ain't happening. Sorry about that if it rocked your boat. 

You're a bit late there. If you had read my post earlier in this thread about what Juncker has said you would know why. My ship has passed its stability test but it looks like yours is way overdue. You don't know what might finally be in this "dog's dinner", or if it will be agreed or not, and neither do I. But it's still a withdrawal treaty and not a template for rejoining.

 

You seem to be keen on dogs but that's all we might have in common.    

[beautifulthailand99]

On 9/16/2019 at 4:37 PM, sammieuk1 said:

A member of the European parliament, Farage has stood for a seat in the British parliament seven times and lost each time.

 

But shunned by the British political establishment, Farage, backed by Eurosceptic financiers, helped sell Brexit to millions of voters in England and Wales who felt ignored by the mainstream Conservative and Labour parties.

 

Sold and bought by fools????

The problem is a fool especially a poor fool looks in the mirror and see a face of hard-done pub-bore sage who has never received their just rewards during their lives. And they think the 'elites' which is anybody richer or better off than them (1) - a think they are stupid  and is trying to get 'something off' of them. It wasn't sold by fools  but by calculating rich establishment disruptors who realise that weaponizing the incoherent rage of the left behind working class is a powerful battering ram for them and their backer's interests.

 

(1) elites that parrot back populist platitudes to gladden their hearts and harden their souls playing variants of the race/immigrant card are not elites. 

[beautifulthailand99]

27 minutes ago, nauseus said:

You're a bit late there. If you had read my post earlier in this thread about what Juncker has said you would know why. My ship has passed its stability test but it looks like yours is way overdue. You don't know what might finally be in this "dog's dinner", or if it will be agreed or not, and neither do I. But it's still a withdrawal treaty and not a template for rejoining.

 

You seem to be keen on dogs but that's all we might have in common.    

I've been away on an enforced holiday - what we do know is that Farage will declare it a potage of poo and advise his troops to stand against the Tories and that will do for me. 

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

I've been away on an enforced holiday - what we do know is that Farage will declare it a potage of poo and advise his troops to stand against the Tories and that will do for me. 

No point. If it's true it would be too late by then.

[wilcopops]

On 9/17/2019 at 10:12 AM, englishoak said:

The British system has had parliament for 800 years...but only had democracy of a sort for about 150 and properly for all for about 90, if the will of the people is thwarted now that democratic experiment has come to an end. Truly all that will be left is a police state and voting proven to be no longer worth the ballot paper. 

 

Why is it that Brexiteers who never showed any interest in democracy before now have the most distorted view possible?

[DannyCarlton]

7 hours ago, nauseus said:

Except that remainers want to overturn the democratic vote of 2016. Right?

As is their right in a democracy. You really don't understand the concept of parliamentary democracy, do you?

[stag4]

9 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

As is their right in a democracy. You really don't understand the concept of parliamentary democracy, do you?

Not until the result of the 2016 referendum has been implemented

[beautifulthailand99]

20 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

As is their right in a democracy. You really don't understand the concept of parliamentary democracy, do you?

We should build a big bonfire of their votes on Parliament Square and burn them on November 5th for the bantz....

[Loiner]

Why is it that Brexiteers who never showed any interest in democracy before now have the most distorted view possible?

Why is it that Remainers think Brexiteers were not previously interested in democracy?
More mind reading or do they actually know everybody and everything?
Encyclopaedia Remainica - a fount of information. (Not necessarily true though)

[CaptainNemo]

19 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

People

 

The people

I see what you did there... you turned my word "people" into a new concept by adding a nother word that wasn't there, and twisting it to become "the people" and presenting it like it meant the same thing.

Remainers are so clever... no wonder they won the refendum (in real life).

18 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

No, a refusal would be no talks

No, a refusal is saying that you refuse, which is what Mr Juncker said.

Sitting in a room with crossed arms saying, "well then", is a bit like a woman throwing a tantrum and sulking, it's not really negotiation, it's more like a weak attempt at attrition.

13 hours ago, wilcopops said:

 

Well you won't find Brexiteers in the sewers, that's where Remainers lurk, raking up ordure to chuck about as they thrash around their keyboards like they'd just necked a pint of flakka.

10 hours ago, MRToMRT said:

You need to get to a temple or practice some deep breathing exercises ;+) Seriously though what's your blood pressure today?

Lower than your mamma's drawers. Is that the best you can manage? I'll leave the heavy breathing to you.

[Bluespunk]

8 minutes ago, CaptainNemo said:

I see what you did there... you turned my word "people" into a new concept by adding a nother word that wasn't there, and twisting it to become "the people" and presenting it like it meant the same thing.

Remainers are so clever... no wonder they won the refendum (in real life).

No, a refusal is saying that you refuse, which is what Mr Juncker said.

Sitting in a room with crossed arms saying, "well then", is a bit like a woman throwing a tantrum and sulking, it's not really negotiation, it's more like a weak attempt at attrition.

Well you won't find Brexiteers in the sewers, that's where Remainers lurk, raking up ordure to chuck about as they thrash around their keyboards like they'd just necked a pint of flakka.

Lower than your mamma's drawers. Is that the best you can manage? I'll leave the heavy breathing to you.

Sentence 1: that partial quote of a post of mine doesn’t answer anything I asked about in my post.

 

I asked when the people voted down mays deal or whether you were referring to those no dealers who sabotaged the deal negotiated by the govt. 

 

Even for you that is a weak attempt at deflection. 

 

Regarding the other post you partially quoted and lumped into this post, the eu is not refusing to negotiate. 

[nauseus]

4 hours ago, DannyCarlton said:

As is their right in a democracy. You really don't understand the concept of parliamentary democracy, do you?

Yes but they don't.

[nauseus]

5 hours ago, wilcopops said:

Why is it that Brexiteers who never showed any interest in democracy before now have the most distorted view possible?

You really need to explain that comment.

[Slip]

On 9/19/2019 at 11:19 PM, CaptainNemo said:

I know it's frustrating isn't it... you have to go and read up facts for yourself rather than quoting misinformed idiots from the Guardian and BBC. It's your lot that made the claim first that it's a myth, and you have failed to support it, so by your own standards you lack credibility.

 

I don't refust to offer anything to back it up, I just insist that you back up your claim that there's no problem first, then I'll respond, rather than me do all the work for you for you to just come back glib and unsubstantiated refutations. I've done this before, I know how the game goes.

 

You are the propagandist, and you'll have to raise your game. I and many others have acres of evidence that utterly refutes your claims, but I'm not going to post it until you post your evidence, because your side made the claim first - that it's a myth about... well go back and read it further up the thread...

I was very busy yesterday, and obviously this thread has moved on in its constant cyclical grind, so I will just refer you to this exchange from 6 weeks ago.  

You will I'm sure note the total lack of evidence in the brexiteer responses.

 

[nauseus]

21 minutes ago, Slip said:

I was very busy yesterday, and obviously this thread has moved on in its constant cyclical grind, so I will just refer you to this exchange from 6 weeks ago.  

You will I'm sure note the total lack of evidence in the brexiteer responses.

 

Everything is truncated and nonsensical. How can there be any response? 

[UKresonant]

Hopefully the UK will be extracted technically by the 1st November, and we can get briefed on what the new situation is for everything from there going forwards.

 

I like political coverage programmes, but it's like any other content, you can only watch so many repeats.

 

I hope individual EU and British citizens, will be spared individual stress, together with communities at the boarder in Ireland, due to any poorly implemented political directives.

 

I hope that the political parties that would intend not implementing a leave action, get relegated to the bottom of political results tables at least for the next decade (even if in the past I may have voted for them). 

 

Perhaps for a good number of years, (at least for a Generation -5 years) we also do not need any further referendums. Unless they look at the Swiss model.

 

Coming from the field we were in 3 and a bit years ago let's hope we can get our boots unstuck from this foggy, muddy road, and get to the equally welcoming field on the other side, that might not be much greener but perhaps has less political poo in it, and have more for the common good discussed, over a friendly picnic environment. 

 

 

 

[7by7]

@CaptainNemo, as i consider my family, work and social lives to be more important than an internet forum, I've not replied until now.

 

I'm not going to waste bandwidth and create massive boredom for all by quoting your posts in full, just the actual points you made in response to the evidence I produced to support my opinion that the Brexiteer myths are just that. 

 

On 9/19/2019 at 6:33 PM, CaptainNemo said:

Quote

UK unemployment has fluctuated slightly month to month, but the trend has been steadily falling since the early 1990s.

This graph doesn't tell you much about the type of employment, or the demographics of the employed.

It also is hosted by the BBC, and yes I regard them as a left-leaning, pro-EU, pro-immigration propaganda organisation, and not as a credible academic source.

 The type of employment and demographics of the employed are not the issue; the issue is that EU membership has not caused mass unemployment ion the UK.

 

You dismiss the figures because I copied the graph from the BBC, yet you, yourself, have used them as a source!

On 9/19/2019 at 6:37 PM, CaptainNemo said:

How do I put this... on BBC radio, it's been repeatedly reported that the EU says there is no further deal to be negotiated.

 So according to you the BBC is a "left-wing, pro EU, pro immigration propaganda organisation" when used as a source against you, but a reliable source when you use it yourself!

 

Even so, look carefully at the graph, the source is the Office for National Statistics. 

 

On 9/19/2019 at 6:33 PM, CaptainNemo said:

Quote

 

The effects of EU migration on Britain in 5 charts

This one is the FT. Yes I regard it as left-leaning, and pro-EU. I also don't have any reason to suppose that a committee made of up pro-immigration, pro-diversity, pro-EU people would conclude anything negative about immigration. I can't view the charts because I don't subscribe to the FT. Feel free to present the information again. Perhaps you have some migration watch data, or something less "journalistic"?

I didn't realise that the average Momentum member reads both the FT and the Socialist Worker!

 

Yet again, you dismiss the information presented based on nothing more than your own prejudice against the source; with zero evidence to back up that source!

 

FYI, if the link doesn't work, put "The effects of EU migration on Britain in 5 charts" into Google and then use the FT link which comes up.

 

You saythat you can't access the article because you don't subscribe to the FT. So how can you dismiss the MAC, the source of most of the research contained therein, as "a committee made of up pro-immigration, pro-diversity, pro-EU people" when you claim you can't read the article to discover their source?

 

On 9/19/2019 at 6:33 PM, CaptainNemo said:

Quote

 

The facts: EU immigration and pressure on the NHS

The source you cite doesn't really support your point of view. The funding for the NHS is under pressure, and increased immigration is both a direct and indirect cause of that, as the graphs in the report show.

 

 

The graphs in the report show no such thing. Why do you say that they do? Do you think people will take your word for it and not look for themselves?

 

They show that EU immigration is the smallest factor in increased NHS costs. They show that any increase caused by EU immigration is covered by the taxes paid by EU immigrants.

 

You have also completely ignored the author's summery of that report, which I repeat here

Quote

EU immigration contributes to financial pressure on the NHS, but its annual impact is small compared to other factors. Whether EU immigrants pay enough into the public finances overall to cover their costs is difficult to say, and researchers give different answers. However, it does appear that they make more of a net contribution than other groups.

The UK doesn’t claim back as much as it could of the cost of treating Europeans who come here for a shorter period as visitors or to live as pensioners, which is mostly down to the NHS not asking for money it is due.

(7by7 emphasis)

 

Your seemingly endless waffle on homelessness and houses contains nothing which counters my and Crises' argument. Especially as you don't seem to know the difference between council housing and social housing; hint, there isn't one!

 

You lambasted me for providing an opinion with no evidence to substantiate it.

 

Indeed, you repeat that in a further post

On 9/19/2019 at 6:39 PM, CaptainNemo said:

Evidence for what?! You made the claim that it's a myth, and nothing you have posted proves a word of your claim.

  But when I repeated the evidence I had posted previously (not my fault if you didn't see it first time round) all you have provided to counter that evidence is your own opinin. You have not produced a single shred of evidence to support that opinion.

 

 

 

[7by7]

On 9/19/2019 at 6:52 PM, CaptainNemo said:

On 9/19/2019 at 6:17 PM, 7by7 said:

 They negotiated, the agreed a deal with the then UK government and we would have left last March had not Rees-Mogg, Johnson and other Tories put personal ambition ahead of country.

 

The EU have repeatedly said that they are willing to negotiate any and all reasonable proposals. But how could they when until today Johnson hadn't given them any proposals to negotiate?

 

Brexit: UK shares confidential documents with EU

 

 

No, you're not getting away with that. I appreciate that you think you are making factual statements when you say so and so put personal ambition first, but actually you are making fatuous statements about the motives of politicians you personally don't like. Even people you don't like have principles.

  

I posted an opinion based upon the actions of those involved. Actions which seem to have vindicated that opinion!

 

On 9/19/2019 at 6:52 PM, CaptainNemo said:

People voted down a terrible deal

People? What people? MPs voted it down, some for political reasons, some for personal reasons and maybe even a few because they thought it was bad for the UK. But I don't recall being asked to vote on it!

 

But I believe I and every other British citizen of voting age should have been. I still do.

 

On 9/19/2019 at 6:52 PM, CaptainNemo said:

that would have resulted in the EU retaining control over a part of the UK. That is totally unacceptable and at odds with the whole idea of leaving the EU.

If you means the backstop, then that was a temporary measure until a more permanent solution to the Irish border problem could be found. Do you really think Johnson's deal, when he reveals it, will be substantially any different?

 

Maybe you will honour us with your solution?

 

On 9/19/2019 at 6:52 PM, CaptainNemo said:

Mrs May was (to put it very politely) exceedingly remiss in trying to pass off such a thing as "a deal".

"You are making fatuous statements about the motives of politicians you personally don't like. Even people you don't like have principles." Now, who was it who said that?

 

On 9/19/2019 at 6:52 PM, CaptainNemo said:

The EU have repeatedly said there's no further deal to negotiate. Their notion of "reasonable" is unreasonable, if it is that they must retain control of part of the UK in order for the UK to be able to leave with a deal. You wouldn't sell your house to someone who insisted on being able to keep using part of it!

 

A deal requires that the EU concede something so that trade can take place between the UK and the EU, trade that a number of EU member state jobs and businesses rely on. The EU isn't acting in the best interests of EU citizens if it chokes exports by demanding political control in exchange for trade.

 The EU have said that they agreed a deal, which the UK Parliament rejected. If we want a new deal, then we need to come up with proposed changes to the previously agreed one.

 

It is up to the current government to decide what those proposed changes are and then present them to the EU for discussion. Don't be surprised when, apart from a few cosmetic changes, the deal Johnson agrees to is identical to May's!

 

Yes, the EU have said that they would prefer a deal, of course they would.; but the ball is in our court and we have far more to lose from a no deal Brexit than they do.

 

 

 

 

 

[7by7]

On 9/20/2019 at 6:53 AM, nauseus said:

On 9/20/2019 at 6:51 AM, RuamRudy said:

Not overturn, but update with a democratic vote in 2020/21.

Operation Overturn it is then.

 

Only if the majority of voters realise that the Leave campaigns sold them a load of pony in 2016 about how we could leave the EU but still enjoy all the benefits of membership and so change their minds. 

 

That is what you Brexiteers are afraid of, and that is why you don't want us, the people to make the final decision on our future.

[7by7]

On 9/20/2019 at 12:19 PM, stag4 said:

Not until the result of the 2016 referendum has been implemented

 When is the best time to rectify a mistake? Before the consequences become disastrous, or after it's too late?

 

But as you Brexiteers are so confident that the majority still want Brexit, even a no deal Brexit, then you have nothing to fear from a final, legally binding referendum. Or do you?

 

 

[nauseus]

39 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 

Only if the majority of voters realise that the Leave campaigns sold them a load of pony in 2016 about how we could leave the EU but still enjoy all the benefits of membership and so change their minds. 

 

That is what you Brexiteers are afraid of, and that is why you don't want us, the people to make the final decision on our future.

Oh Lordy Lord. It seems that the weekend is well and truly upon us! And I was having a relatively nice time.

 

[kingdong]

On 9/16/2019 at 4:37 PM, sammieuk1 said:

A member of the European parliament, Farage has stood for a seat in the British parliament seven times and lost each time.

 

But shunned by the British political establishment, Farage, backed by Eurosceptic financiers, helped sell Brexit to millions of voters in England and Wales who felt ignored by the mainstream Conservative and Labour parties.

 

Sold and bought by fools????

the brexit vote was a direct consequence of the scorn and contempt shown by the politicians to the electorate.POWER TO THE PEOPLE.

[kingdong]

the remain camp were offered a general election and bottled it,what are you so scared of?another defeat?

[SheungWan]

the remain camp were offered a general election and bottled it,what are you so scared of?another defeat?

About level with Hard Brexiteers fear of a second referendum prior. Good luck to the opposition in Parliament making it so.

Sent from my SM-N935F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[SheungWan]

the brexit vote was a direct consequence of the scorn and contempt shown by the politicians to the electorate.POWER TO THE PEOPLE.

Maybe this and maybe that but the Hard Brexiteers in danger of frittering the result away.

Sent from my SM-N935F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app