Common sense from NI agriculture correspondent

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39690873

Brexiteers and remainers balanced

 

democracy?

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-news-opposition-remain-record-high-poll-snap-general-election-theresa-may-a7699321.html

So Brexit was funded by our greatest people!

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-leave-eu-campaign-arron-banks-jeremy-hosking-five-uk-richest-businessmen-peter-hargreaves-a7699046.html

 

How embarrassing 

 

There speaks the Independent, a paper owned by Russian Billionaires Alexander Lebedev and Evgeny Lebedev. As Independent as it gets.

No mention of the State sponsored Remain or the millions donated by just a few to it.

 

Almost as bad as reading the Guardian or Mail.

On 4/2/2017 at 7:19 AM, Khun Han said:

 

If you think anything's going to change for Gibraltar you are living in cloud cuckoo land.

Nothing's going to change, but that chunk of rock belongs to Spain. We keep these little territories over the world so we can launch a strike force from them. I don't know of any strikes we've made yet.

22 minutes ago, Flustered said:

There speaks the Independent, a paper owned by Russian Billionaires Alexander Lebedev and Evgeny Lebedev. As Independent as it gets.

 

 

No mention of the State sponsored Remain or the millions donated by just a few to it.

 

 

 

Almost as bad as reading the Guardian or Mail.

 

 

 

 

 

No, not really

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evgeny_Lebedev

 

Certainly much more editorial freedom than Murdoch rags. What point are you trying to make? Their journalism seems fine to me.

 

What would you suggest? The FT? The Economist?

1 minute ago, uptheos said:

Nothing's going to change, but that chunk of rock belongs to Spain. We keep these little territories over the world so we can launch a strike force from them. I don't know of any strikes we've made yet.

Just like Singapore? Or Hong Kong? Maybe the Falklands?

6 minutes ago, uptheos said:

Nothing's going to change, but that chunk of rock belongs to Spain. We keep these little territories over the world so we can launch a strike force from them. I don't know of any strikes we've made yet.

I guess you haven't yet bothered to read up the significance and part played by Gibralter in World War 2

6 minutes ago, uptheos said:

Nothing's going to change, but that chunk of rock belongs to Spain. We keep these little territories over the world so we can launch a strike force from them. I don't know of any strikes we've made yet.

It does not belong to Spain, it was ceded to Great Britain "in perpetuity" under the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713

 

If it belongs to Spain then half of France belongs to Great Britain.

1 minute ago, Basil B said:

It does not belong to Spain, it was ceded to Great Britain "in perpetuity" under the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713

 

If it belongs to Spain then half of France belongs to Great Britain.

Well, just give them a present because we're nice guys.

9 hours ago, nontabury said:

In 1975 those who voted against joining the EEC, by and large accepted the decision. I certainly don't recall demonstration by an un-democratic element.

 

Earlier on in this thread you asked if I thought the People should be granted another referendum,when we know the outcome of the negotiations,as that is what you beleive in. I said that's O.K with me. But what about other Remoaners.

 

 

 

I don't quite see the relevance of this reply. There were those in 1975 who did not accept the decision to remain in the EU and in fact those such as Farage who stated that in the event of a narrow win for REMAIN  would not accept it this time either or indeed others like Bill Cash on the Tory hard right who stated that whatever the margin they would not accept the result as final and would continue with their campaign to leave the EU. From 1975 onward there has always been an element who have never accepted that we should be in the EU. At no time were they on the receiving end of death threats or MPs who took a principled stand told they were enemies of the people or even assassinated. One has only to look at TV where a person in favour of REMAIN was equated to some wartime traitor convicted of treason. 

When Macron leads in the first round of a democratic vote in France he is described as a stooge, I guess that is the norm these days

One would think there had been an overwhelming vote in favour of leaving the EU in fact it wasn't even a majority of the electorate eligible to vote.

As to the video I see a lot of these Andrew Neil destroys and numerous other videos where some REMAINER has been destroyed which appear on pro Brexit sites and I have yet to see any destroying.

 

20 hours ago, Johnyo said:

 

In this case it's a foregone conclusion. The vast majority of the remaining 55 % will most likely vote for Macron.

On a side note what is it with you Brexiteers wanting the EU to implode? Enjoy your victory and simply wish the best for the rest. Don't forget there are a lot of ordinary people with savings and pensions in EUR and the EU imploding would harm their finances.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

Well said. Many brexiteers were incapable of rational argument so the collapse of the EU was last line of defence.

9 hours ago, uptheos said:

Well, just give them a present because we're nice guys.

The will of the people only counts when it suits.

2 hours ago, pitrevie said:

I don't quite see the relevance of this reply. There were those in 1975 who did not accept the decision to remain in the EU and in fact those such as Farage who stated that in the event of a narrow win for REMAIN  would not accept it this time either or indeed others like Bill Cash on the Tory hard right who stated that whatever the margin they would not accept the result as final and would continue with their campaign to leave the EU. From 1975 onward there has always been an element who have never accepted that we should be in the EU. At no time were they on the receiving end of death threats or MPs who took a principled stand told they were enemies of the people or even assassinated. One has only to look at TV where a person in favour of REMAIN was equated to some wartime traitor convicted of treason. 

When Macron leads in the first round of a democratic vote in France he is described as a stooge, I guess that is the norm these days

One would think there had been an overwhelming vote in favour of leaving the EU in fact it wasn't even a majority of the electorate eligible to vote.

As to the video I see a lot of these Andrew Neil destroys and numerous other videos where some REMAINER has been destroyed which appear on pro Brexit sites and I have yet to see any destroying.

 

Farage never said he would not accept the result if they lost. I have already posted a video,showing that he has denied doing so.

 

Macron the so called ex-banker,representing the political establishment,who I agree will more than likely win in two weeks time.

 

Can I suggest that you watch the video again at 6 and a half minutes. As Gina Miller another member of the financial establishment, and prominent Remoaner states very clearly (unusually for her) that the final decision when the negotiations are completed, 

" Should NOT be decided democratically by the electorate"  which I beleive you have been arguing for. Preferring instead for that decision to be taken by the establishment.

 

 

2 hours ago, pitrevie said:

 

As to the video I see a lot of these Andrew Neil destroys and numerous other videos where some REMAINER has been destroyed which appear on pro Brexit sites and I have yet to see any destroying.

 

Spot on. Andrew Neil along with other news presenters are paid to antagonize guests and provoke reaction. Headlines are then worded to try and attract viewers.

If anything Gina Miller destroyed what Andrew Neil was trying to do.

The problem with these debates is that they will continually use the word 'brexit', it was never on the ballot paper. How on earth can you ask a serious question with ambiguous content.

 

16 minutes ago, nontabury said:

Farage never said he would not accept the result if they lost. I have already posted a video,showing that he has denied doing so.

You can always use the English language to dodge the issue.

 

Nigel Farage warns today he would fight for a second referendum on Britain in Europe if the remain campaign won by a narrow margin next month.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017

4 minutes ago, nontabury said:

Farage never said he would not accept the result if they lost. I have already posted a video,showing that he has denied doing so.

 

Macron the so called ex-banker,representing the political establishment,who I agree will more than likely win in two weeks time.

 

Can I suggest that you watch the video again at 6 and a half minutes. As Gina Miller another member of the financial establishment, and prominent Remoaner states very clearly (unusually for her) that the final decision when the negotiations are completed, 

" Should NOT be decided democratically by the electorate"  which I beleive you have been arguing for. Preferring instead for that decision to be taken by the establishment.

 

 

 

I have made that point over and over again, " Should NOT be decided democratically by the electorate", I happen to believe in Parliament making the decision so I totally agree with Miller and I have repeated that over and over again. The PM did try and get away with using the Royal Prerogative to invoke article 50, hilarious when you think back to all the undemocratic jibes that have been direct at the EU Parliament who are even going to have the final say on whether to approve the final deal which is what May had to be forced into conceding. Its why despite all her promises about not having an election she has decided now to have one in the hope that she can secure a big enough majority to secure acceptance in Parliament.

However I have been wholly consistent in stating that,  unlike your position which is that these treaties were imposed on you and that they should have been put to the British people presumably through a referendum. Now apparently like many other pro Brexiters when we negotiate the final trade deal it doesn't matter what form it takes you have suddenly lost interest in giving your approval by referendum.

 

5 minutes ago, sandyf said:

You can always use the English language to dodge the issue.

 

Nigel Farage warns today he would fight for a second referendum on Britain in Europe if the remain campaign won by a narrow margin next month.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017

It wasn't only Farage who stated this. Bill Cash a leading Tory Brexiter stated very clearly that whatever the result he would not accept it as final if it favoured REMAIN.

30 minutes ago, nontabury said:

Farage never said he would not accept the result if they lost. I have already posted a video,showing that he has denied doing so.

 

Macron the so called ex-banker,representing the political establishment,who I agree will more than likely win in two weeks time.

 

Can I suggest that you watch the video again at 6 and a half minutes. As Gina Miller another member of the financial establishment, and prominent Remoaner states very clearly (unusually for her) that the final decision when the negotiations are completed, 

" Should NOT be decided democratically by the electorate"  which I beleive you have been arguing for. Preferring instead for that decision to be taken by the establishment.

 

 

Of course Farage denies saying it now but the Mirror has his statement in quotations, I suppose he could always sue them. However the Mirror article was in May when it looked as if the REMAIN side would win by a narrow margin. At no time did Farage deny what he had said until after the result when LEAVE won by a narrow margin.

 

The Ukip leader said a small defeat for his leave camp would be “unfinished business” and predicted pressure would grow for a re-run of the 23 June ballot.
Farage told the Mirror: “In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it.”

 

He also denied saying that the 350 million could be used for the NHS but unfortunately for him he is on video saying just that. 

3 hours ago, sandyf said:

You can always use the English language to dodge the issue.

 

Nigel Farage warns today he would fight for a second referendum on Britain in Europe if the remain campaign won by a narrow margin next month.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017

As quoted by the Mirror.

4 minutes ago, nontabury said:

As quoted by the Mirror.

Farage warns PM over ‘unfinished business’ if Remain narrowly wins ‘unfair’ EU referendum

May 17th Pro Brexit Daily Express

 

Much the same as he said to the Mirror which he is now claiming didn't mean what it meant.

3 hours ago, pitrevie said:

 

I have made that point over and over again, " Should NOT be decided democratically by the electorate", I happen to believe in Parliament making the decision so I totally agree with Miller and I have repeated that over and over again. The PM did try and get away with using the Royal Prerogative to invoke article 50, hilarious when you think back to all the undemocratic jibes that have been direct at the EU Parliament who are even going to have the final say on whether to approve the final deal which is what May had to be forced into conceding. Its why despite all her promises about not having an election she has decided now to have one in the hope that she can secure a big enough majority to secure acceptance in Parliament.

However I have been wholly consistent in stating that,  unlike your position which is that these treaties were imposed on you and that they should have been put to the British people presumably through a referendum. Now apparently like many other pro Brexiters when we negotiate the final trade deal it doesn't matter what form it takes you have suddenly lost interest in giving your approval by referendum.

 

No,your miss quoting me. When, and if a trade deal is agreed, I' m O.K with it either way, put to another referendum or leave it to the House of Commons.

I just wish the previous,so called treaties,had been put to a referendum. Then one way or another,we would't be having this disagreement. 

 

 

 

 

This looks plausible

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/brussels-to-hit-britain-with-2bn-fraud-claim-gz7t6wk9n?CMP=TNLEmail_118918_1777741

 

I have no confidence in UK Border controls or customs and excise

 

As always, underfunded and slow to implement appropriate systems

29 minutes ago, nontabury said:

No,your miss quoting me. When, and if a trade deal is agreed, I' m O.K with it either way, put to another referendum or leave it to the House of Commons.

I just wish the previous,so called treaties,had been put to a referendum. Then one way or another,we would't be having this disagreement. 

 

 

 

 

"When, and if a trade deal is agreed, I' m O.K with it either way, put to another referendum or leave it to the House of Commons."

 

I agree with the above comment - as long as the question is 'accept the agreement/leave without any agreement'.

 

This simple yes/no question would focus both UK and EU negotiators to genuinely come up with the best possible deal for both sides.

 

Edit - Emboldening my reply as its hard to see, and I don't want to fall foul of moderation rules.  Hopefully, emboldening my own post doesn't fall foul of those rules. 

Edited April 25, 20179 yr by dick dasterdly

9 minutes ago, nontabury said:

No,your miss quoting me. When, and if a trade deal is agreed, I' m O.K with it either way, put to another referendum or leave it to the House of Commons.

I just wish the previous,so called treaties,had been put to a referendum. Then one way or another,we would't be having this disagreement. 

 

 

 

 

You have been asked this same question many times and it is only recently that you have supported the idea of a referendum on any final deal safe in the knowledge that May is never going to allow it.

 

Of course we don't put these things to a referendum that is not the way the UK works. As Thatcher pointed out if it was we would never have abolished hanging. However throughout the late seventies and early eighties we did have a major party supporting withdrawal from the EU and one that in favour of the EU, for some reason the anti EU party could never get into power.

 

How many of the electorate who have taken the trouble to inform themselves about the Lisbon treaty. Its obvious from your remarks that you don't even appreciate what joining the EEC entailed. It was all there, the founding fathers made very clear where it was leading or was it supposed to stay the same for all time.

 

 “As long as Europe remains divided it will be weak and a constant source of conflict.we have laid the
foundations on which we shall be able to build the United States of Europe which will be
free, vigorous, peaceful and prosperous.” (Jean Monnet, speech to the National Press
Club, 30th April 1952, Washington). 

 

They were building an United States of Europe so what exactly did you think that entail, just a customs union. However when you hold a referendum who bothers to inform themselves about anything.

 

 

21 minutes ago, Grouse said:

This looks plausible

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/brussels-to-hit-britain-with-2bn-fraud-claim-gz7t6wk9n?CMP=TNLEmail_118918_1777741

 

I have no confidence in UK Border controls or customs and excise

 

As always, underfunded and slow to implement appropriate systems

Hasn't this been discussed in another thread (or earlier in this thread)?

 

I can't read the article as its behind a pay-wall, but assume its the same 'story'?

41 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Hasn't this been discussed in another thread (or earlier in this thread)?

 

I can't read the article as its behind a pay-wall, but assume its the same 'story'?

You can get a couple of articles free I believe.

 

The issue is that apparantly the Chinese see the U.K. as the soft underbelly of the EU which lets them bring in to Europe huge quantities of apparel and shoes at a massive undervalue and defrauding mainland EU of billions in duty and VAT

20 minutes ago, Grouse said:

You can get a couple of articles free I believe.

 

The issue is that apparantly the Chinese see the U.K. as the soft underbelly of the EU which lets them bring in to Europe huge quantities of apparel and shoes at a massive undervalue and defrauding mainland EU of billions in duty and VAT

The UK isn't known as being the 'soft underbelly' of the EU - so is the article saying that UK customs officers are fraudulently (and illegally) allowing in huge quantities of etc. etc.?

 

Possible I suppose, but wouldn't the Chinese be better off using an EU country known to be corrupt?

Not to mention that we already know that a lot of EU money has been wasted by the corrupt and fraudulent within various EU countries (not to mention the waste of SO much money by the EU itself....) - so deciding to hold the UK responsible for money wasted seems a touch hypocritical and just a good 'headline' by a remain newspaper?

Just now, dick dasterdly said:

The UK isn't known as being the 'soft underbelly' of the EU - so is the article saying that UK customs officers are fraudulently (and illegally) allowing in huge quantities of etc. etc.?

 

Possible I suppose, but wouldn't the Chinese be better off using an EU country known to be corrupt?

Background

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-39206513