May ready for tough talks over Brexit

[AlexRich]

2 minutes ago, jimmybkk said:

If all is not well it is because Cammo failed to live up to his responsibilities and was incapable of coming up with a gameplan for the flip side of a coin toss that he himself instigated... and yet this is the guy who you would want to be leading the country? Go figure...

 

I've not mentioned anything about Cameron, or wanting him to lead the country? Cameron had no choice but to go ... not unexpected. 

[dick dasterdly]

2 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

 

A publication by Deloittes? Who do you think they are? A student blog? They are one of the biggest audit and consultancy companies in the world, who have close links with and work extensively with Government and businesses in the UK. 

 

I was less interested in where it came from, more concerned with the content. The question you should be asking is the view expressed accurate? They have stated that business believes that the Government are more interested in staying in power and have no strategy on brexit ... given Deloitte's extensive links to both business and Government you might want to sit up and take notice. The report was not fake and the opinions expressed were very real. 

 

Re. the second para - obviously, as you posted that it was a memo prepared for the Cabinet..... 

 

Whereas it turned out to be a memo for 'internal use within Deloittes', that was somehow 'leaked to The Times as a memo prepared for the Cabinet.

 

How on earth did this happen?  Surely The Times (a respected newspaper) checks its sources??

[jimmybkk]

5 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

 

A publication by Deloittes? Who do you think they are? A student blog? They are one of the biggest audit and consultancy companies in the world, who have close links with and work extensively with Government and businesses in the UK. 

 

I was less interested in where it came from, more concerned with the content. The question you should be asking is the view expressed accurate? They have stated that business believes that the Government are more interested in staying in power and have no strategy on brexit ... given Deloitte's extensive links to both business and Government you might want to sit up and take notice. The report was not fake and the opinions expressed were very real. 

 

 

You sir, are going around in circles. You start by giving credit to Deloitte's credentials, then say you were less interested in where it came from than the content, then suggest asking whether the expressed view is accurate... Are you for real?

 

So... is there a relationship between the credentials of those expressing the views in that article and the views they are expressing or not?

[jimmybkk]

4 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

 

I've not mentioned anything about Cameron, or wanting him to lead the country? Cameron had no choice but to go ... not unexpected. 

 

Ah, but by expressing a preference for Remain, Cameron leading the country is exactly what would've happened had the outcome of the referendum been to Remain, no? One begats the other I believe.

[dick dasterdly]

11 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

 

A publication by Deloittes? Who do you think they are? A student blog? They are one of the biggest audit and consultancy companies in the world, who have close links with and work extensively with Government and businesses in the UK. 

 

I was less interested in where it came from, more concerned with the content. The question you should be asking is the view expressed accurate? They have stated that business believes that the Government are more interested in staying in power and have no strategy on brexit ... given Deloitte's extensive links to both business and Government you might want to sit up and take notice. The report was not fake and the opinions expressed were very real. 

 

 

1 minute ago, jimmybkk said:

 

You sir, are going around in circles. You start by giving credit to Deloitte's credentials, then say you were less interested in where it came from than the content, then suggest asking whether the expressed view is accurate... Are you for real?

 

So... is there a relationship between the credentials of those expressing the views in that article and the views they are expressing or not?

Deloittes have lost a lot of credibility by giving this 'memo' (according to them only intended for internal use) to various other parties - and taking so long to admit that it wasn't a "memo prepared for Cabinet" as claimed by The Times.

[AlexRich]

10 minutes ago, jimmybkk said:

There are really only 2 yes/no questions that should be asked of those debating this topic now:

 

1. Do you support a democratic system of governance?

2. Do you believe that the Brexit referendum was somehow rigged?

 

If you answered No to the first question then the UK is probably not the right place for you, and you can forget about question 2.

 

If you answered yes to the second question then please advise how you believe it was rigged?

 

If you answered Yes to the first question and No to the second question, then you really ought to be satisfied that the democratic process has been confirmed to be fully functional in the UK, and you should take some solace in that. Bemoaning the fact that more people had a preference that was not the same as yours than than those who had a preference that was the same as yours is pure selfishness and just makes you look like a childish, sore loser who hates the taste of sour grapes and who only favours the democratic process when the results go their way.

 

So you are framing the views of the entire population with your two question test?

 

Nigel Farage stated on the eve of the referendum that he would fight on if they lost by a narrow margin like ... 52/48. I don't like Nigel Farage but that is his democratic right, so I can't really complain, can I? When a new Government as been elected by the people they have a mandate to implement their manifesto policies, but the opposition still have a role to play in expressing the wishes of their support base in parliament ... they don't just support the Government because they never made it past the post, do they? That's democracy. And on that subject, what mandate from an election does the Mayhem Government have? They are forcing through a hardcore Brexit with no involvement of parliament and are appealing against a court ruling on Article 50. It appears that they want the rule of law and democracy ... but not quite yet. A bit like yourself?

 

The fact that people are fighting for their rights and their views to be heard is democracy in action. The fact that you are unhappy about it makes you look like a guy who would prefer to live in a dictatorship. The biggest moaners are in fact Leave voters, who shout about democracy and the rule of law but don't like it when they see it in action against their personal wishes.

 

 

 

[AlexRich]

15 minutes ago, jimmybkk said:

 

You sir, are going around in circles. You start by giving credit to Deloitte's credentials, then say you were less interested in where it came from than the content, then suggest asking whether the expressed view is accurate... Are you for real?

 

So... is there a relationship between the credentials of those expressing the views in that article and the views they are expressing or not?

 

What I stated is that even if it did not come from the Cabinet (i.e. where it came from), you cannot discredit the quality of the source (Deloitte) or the quality of the content, given their credentials.

 

The newspaper stated it was a Cabinet document, and that appears to be incorrect. But so what? The question you should be concerned about is not that, but whether the views expressed are accurate ... given Deloitte's links to both business and government, and given their credentials ... they most certainly are accurate.

 

Good try at obfuscating the argument ... but no cigar! 

 

 

[AlexRich]

18 minutes ago, jimmybkk said:

 

Ah, but by expressing a preference for Remain, Cameron leading the country is exactly what would've happened had the outcome of the referendum been to Remain, no? One begats the other I believe.

 

"... yet this is the guy you would want to be leading the country ..."

 

Your words, not mine. How could you possibly know who I would want to lead the country? I don't think a majority of the voting public voted conservative ... I didn't.

 

What exactly have the "Mayhem" government achieved? Nothing of any substance except a puerile banner statement ... "brexit means brexit" ... like "beanz meanz hienz" ... meaningless. They are in disarray with little clue what they are doing. You prefer that leadership?

 

[AlexRich]

24 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

Deloittes have lost a lot of credibility by giving this 'memo' (according to them only intended for internal use) to various other parties - and taking so long to admit that it wasn't a "memo prepared for Cabinet" as claimed by The Times.

 

If a document is leaked there's not much a firm like Deloitte's can do about it. But does that mean that the content and views expressed are any less accurate?

 

A lot of fuss around the fact that the document was leaked and did not in fact come from the Cabinet ... completely misses the point. A convenient distraction from the issues ... there is no brexit plan and the Mayhem government are more concerned with their own futures than the country's future.

 

[jimmybkk]

2 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

 

"... yet this is the guy you would want to be leading the country ..."

 

Your words, not mine. How could you possibly know who I would want to lead the country? I don't think a majority of the voting public voted conservative ... I didn't.

 

What exactly have the "Mayhem" government achieved? Nothing of any substance except a puerile banner statement ... "brexit means brexit" ... like "beanz meanz hienz" ... meaningless. They are in disarray with little clue what they are doing. You prefer that leadership?

 

 

"Your words, not mine. How could you possibly know who I would want to lead the country?"

 

Well, you would have preferred a Remain outcome, yes? And you have informed us all that Cameron's departure was a foregone conclusion in the event of a vote for Leave... Are you also saying that his departure would have ensued a vote for Remain? I haven't heard you mention that previously so I am assuming that he would have been sticking around had Britain voted to Remain...

 

What you are saying is tantamount to saying: "A dentist told me that if I kept eating candy I would have cavities... I didn't stop eating candy, but that doesn't mean I wanted cavities..."

 

So yeah, nice try by you but the result of your preferred outcome of the referendum remains the same, and claiming ignorance of the outcome does nothing more than highlight your ignorance.

 

 

[jimmybkk]

19 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

 

What I stated is that even if it did not come from the Cabinet (i.e. where it came from), you cannot discredit the quality of the source (Deloitte) or the quality of the content, given their credentials.

 

The newspaper stated it was a Cabinet document, and that appears to be incorrect. But so what? The question you should be concerned about is not that, but whether the views expressed are accurate ... given Deloitte's links to both business and government, and given their credentials ... they most certainly are accurate.

 

Good try at obfuscating the argument ... but no cigar! 

 

 

 

Nope - please highlight in your post where you stated that: "What I stated is that even if it did not come from the Cabinet"

 

In fact, please quote and highlight where the word "Cabinet"  even appears in your post...

 

Uhmmm.... waiting....

[AlexRich]

7 minutes ago, jimmybkk said:

 

"Your words, not mine. How could you possibly know who I would want to lead the country?"

 

Well, you would have preferred a Remain outcome, yes? And you have informed us all that Cameron's departure was a foregone conclusion in the event of a vote for Leave... Are you also saying that his departure would have ensued a vote for Remain? I haven't heard you mention that previously so I am assuming that he would have been sticking around had Britain voted to Remain...

 

What you are saying is tantamount to saying: "A dentist told me that if I kept eating candy I would have cavities... I didn't stop eating candy, but that doesn't mean I wanted cavities..."

 

So yeah, nice try by you but the result of your preferred outcome of the referendum remains the same, and claiming ignorance of the outcome does nothing more than highlight your ignorance.

 

 

 

I'll do my best, but I'm struggling to make sense of the above?

 

Cameron was leaving before the end of this term in Government, he'd already stated that. Is it possible to want to Remain in the EU but not be happy with a Cameron government? You seem to think not? You might take this view if you thought the outcome of Leave would be worse ... I don't care much for any of them, but if I'd just rather we stay in the EU. 

 

As for your dentist analogy? Eh?

 

Claiming ignorance of the outcome highlights my ignorance? Eh?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[jimmybkk]

36 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

 

So you are framing the views of the entire population with your two question test?

 

Nigel Farage stated on the eve of the referendum that he would fight on if they lost by a narrow margin like ... 52/48. I don't like Nigel Farage but that is his democratic right, so I can't really complain, can I? When a new Government as been elected by the people they have a mandate to implement their manifesto policies, but the opposition still have a role to play in expressing the wishes of their support base in parliament ... they don't just support the Government because they never made it past the post, do they? That's democracy. And on that subject, what mandate from an election does the Mayhem Government have? They are forcing through a hardcore Brexit with no involvement of parliament and are appealing against a court ruling on Article 50. It appears that they want the rule of law and democracy ... but not quite yet. A bit like yourself?

 

The fact that people are fighting for their rights and their views to be heard is democracy in action. The fact that you are unhappy about it makes you look like a guy who would prefer to live in a dictatorship. The biggest moaners are in fact Leave voters, who shout about democracy and the rule of law but don't like it when they see it in action against their personal wishes.

 

 

 

Hahahaha....!!! Congrats for the funniest post I have read in quite a while.

 

Disparaging comments such as the "Mayhem Government" give a good indication of your intentions and objectives. You are aware that the UK Government has not changed since Brexit, right? Uhmmm... you know it was just a change in personnel, right? Uhmmm... yeah... I guess that's all that needs to be said really... Carry on the good work old chap. I'm sure you're convincing someone... somewhere... 

[Laughing Gravy]

1 hour ago, RuamRudy said:

 

You were confident enough to make the above statement when CrackHouseParty declared with complete certainty that there was no connection between Brexit and the murder of Jo Cox. Which particular Oracle told you that? 

CrackHouseParty are you sure you are not smoking some of that yourself.

[AlexRich]

12 minutes ago, jimmybkk said:

 

Nope - please highlight in your post where you stated that: "What I stated is that even if it did not come from the Cabinet"

 

In fact, please quote and highlight where the word "Cabinet"  even appears in your post...

 

Uhmmm.... waiting....

 

1 hour ago, dick dasterdly said:

s this last post as accurate as the previous posts endorsing the 'leaked Deloittes cabinet memo' - that turned out to be nothing of the sort?

 

I responded to the above comment by DD. 

 

... "the leaked Deloitte's cabinet memo ..." 

 

... "that turned out to be nothing of the sort?"

 

So what is he saying? He's stating that the document was not a "Cabinet memo" ... in other words, that's not where it came from.

 

You've just conveniently ignored the fact that I responded to the above post ... that it does not matter where it came from ... it matters whether the views expressed are accurate.

 

Again, good try, but no cigar! 

 

 

 

[jimmybkk]

7 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

 

I'll do my best, but I'm struggling to make sense of the above?

 

Cameron was leaving before the end of this term in Government, he'd already stated that. Is it possible to want to Remain in the EU but not be happy with a Cameron government? You seem to think not? You might take this view if you thought the outcome of Leave would be worse ... I don't care much for any of them, but if I'd just rather we stay in the EU. 

 

As for your dentist analogy? Eh?

 

Claiming ignorance of the outcome highlights my ignorance? Eh?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh... Did you just pass the baton to one of your less literate teammates without telling me? Shame on you Alex...

[RuamRudy]

1 minute ago, Laughing Gravy said:

CrackHouseParty are you sure you are not smoking some of that yourself.

 

Did I get his name wrong? I really cannot be bothered to go and check again - but do try to answer the question rather than post nothing of substance.

 

You stated 'Game, set and match.' when a particular user stated with conviction that the murderer was not influenced by Brexit. You must have inside knowledge to make such a bold claim, especially as you so openly challenge others for making assumptions. So please tell us - from where do you get such insight?

[Khun Han]

1 hour ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

 

 

Is this last post as accurate as the previous posts endorsing the 'leaked Deloittes cabinet memo' - that turned out to be nothing of the sort?

 

Edit - Although to be fair I think SandyF posted this (eventually) discredited memo first, possibly in another thread.  I'd love to know how this memo - that Deloittes eventually said was prepared as an 'internal memo' - appeared as a major item in The Times....

 

I'd love to know how this memo - that Deloittes eventually said was prepared as an 'internal memo' - appeared as a major item in The Times....

 

Project Fear 

[Laughing Gravy]

26 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

 

If a document is leaked there's not much a firm like Deloitte's can do about it. But does that mean that the content and views expressed are any less accurate?

 

A lot of fuss around the fact that the document was leaked and did not in fact come from the Cabinet ... completely misses the point. A convenient distraction from the issues ... there is no brexit plan and the Mayhem government are more concerned with their own futures than the country's future.

 

The telegraph would disagree with you as would the PM Theresa may. She just isn't telling anyone and rightly so. You should no it anyway as you always know what people would say and do better than themselves, oh Oracle.

 

The leaked Deloitte memo claiming that Theresa May has “no plan” for Brexit has provided joyous fodder for so-called “Bremoaners” desperate to prove that leaving the EU is impossible and unworkable, but that doesn’t make it so.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/16/theresa-may-does-have-a-plan-for-brexit--the-question-is-whether/

[AlexRich]

6 minutes ago, jimmybkk said:

Hahahaha....!!! Congrats for the funniest post I have read in quite a while.

 

Disparaging comments such as the "Mayhem Government" give a good indication of your intentions and objectives. You are aware that the UK Government has not changed since Brexit, right? Uhmmm... you know it was just a change in personnel, right? Uhmmm... yeah... I guess that's all that needs to be said really... Carry on the good work old chap. I'm sure you're convincing someone... somewhere... 

 

I'm not trying to convince you of anything. Just expressing my views on this forum. But it looks like the Mayhem Government are messing up the brexit strategy ... they don't have one. The next election will do the rest ... May really needs to do it quickly before people wake up to her incompetence.

[Laughing Gravy]

4 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Did I get his name wrong? I really cannot be bothered to go and check again - but do try to answer the question rather than post nothing of substance.

 

You stated 'Game, set and match.' when a particular user stated with conviction that the murderer was not influenced by Brexit. You must have inside knowledge to make such a bold claim, especially as you so openly challenge others for making assumptions. So please tell us - from where do you get such insight?

That is the problem. You can't be bothered to go back and read. AlexRich stated. yes stated, he knows that the referendum caused the killer, to kill Jo Cox. I agree where does anyone get such insight from. That is my whole point.

Edited November 17, 2016 by Laughing Gravy

[AlexRich]

3 minutes ago, jimmybkk said:

 

Oh... Did you just pass the baton to one of your less literate teammates without telling me? Shame on you Alex...

 

 

You make no sense? You've lost the argument, be careful you don't lose the plot into the bargain!

[AlexRich]

1 minute ago, Laughing Gravy said:

That is the problem. You can't be bothered to go back and read. AlexRich stated. yes stated he knows that he knows that the referendum caused the killer to kill Jo Cox. I agree where does anyone get such insight from. That is my whole point.

 

And you have stated the opposite ... where did you get your insight from?

[RuamRudy]

1 minute ago, Laughing Gravy said:

That is the problem. You can't be bothered to go back and read. AlexRich stated. yes stated he knows that he knows that the referendum caused the killer to kill Jo Cox. I agree where does anyone get such insight from. That is my whole point.

 

My god, I feel like I should be typing extra big words in an attempt to help you because this is clearly not easy for you. 

 

You agreed with absolute fervour with a post that stated that there was no connection between Brexit and the murder, yet you criticise those who oppose that view as speaking without proof.  Can you see the hypocrisy between holding your own position without proof, yet challenging those who disagree - for having no proof?

[Laughing Gravy]

4 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

 

And you have stated the opposite ... where did you get your insight from?

I have stated there is no evidence. A big difference. You don't need evidence you know as a fact. Your word.

 

[AlexRich]

8 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

I'd love to know how this memo - that Deloittes eventually said was prepared as an 'internal memo' - appeared as a major item in The Times....

 

Project Fear 

 

"Brexit means Brexit"

 

"Project fear"

 

"will of the people"

 

... all banner slogans used to avoid facing the facts. Brexit is, even in these early stages, looking like a shambles ... and no banner slogan can distract from it. 

 

 

[Laughing Gravy]

1 minute ago, RuamRudy said:

 

My god, I feel like I should be typing extra big words in an attempt to help you because this is clearly not easy for you. 

 

You agreed with absolute fervour with a post that stated that there was no connection between Brexit and the murder, yet you criticise those who oppose that view as speaking without proof.  Can you see the hypocrisy between holding your own position without proof, yet challenging those who disagree - for having no proof?

There is no evidence that the murder was linked to the referendum. I am criticizing ta poster as they are saying. They know as a fact. that I want to see. No hypocrisy at all. There is no proof for either that is my point. There are people trying to make a link, like in the mainstream media but once again no proof. I am not stating or I know as a fact Like AlexRich. I am stating their is no evidence, no proof. I do not know. I am not the Oracle

[AlexRich]

2 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

There is no evidence that the murder was linked to the referendum. I am criticizing ta poster as they are saying. They know as a fact. that I want to see. No hypocrisy at all. There is no proof for either that is my point. There are people trying to make a link, like in the mainstream media but once again no proof. I am not stating or I know as a fact Like AlexRich. I am stating their is no evidence, no proof. I do not know. I am not the Oracle

 

Thomas Mair, an unhinged man, full of hate, encouraged by the nasty atmosphere and xenophobia stirred up by the referendum, kills a sitting MP.

 

The Polish Centre in Hammersmith vandalised that day after the referendum, with anti-Polish slogans daubed on the wall.

 

Waitresses from Eastern Europe being asked by kindly English people "when they are going home"? Racial abuse of people on public transport, again with the "go home" theme.

 

... according to Laughing Gravy there is no proof that the referendum stoked up these feelings, they are all just a coincidence?

 

You don't want to acknowledge that the referendum has split the UK and left it a nastier and more xenophobic nation than it has ever been. 

 

When the Nazi's came to power Germans believed that these fine patriots would be good for the nation. Kids joined the Hitler Youth ... conveniently overlooking the underlying nastiness of their views ... they all woke up eventually. Best not be an apologist for the hate-filled.

 

 

 

 

 

[CharlieK]

34 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

I have stated there is no evidence. A big difference. You don't need evidence you know as a fact. Your word.

 

 

So when Mair shouted  "This is for Britain. Britain will always come first," and when he was arrested said he was a" political activist" isn't evidence that brexit was the reason? Which planet are you on?

[Khun Han]

1 hour ago, CharlieK said:

 

So when Mair shouted  "This is for Britain. Britain will always come first," and when he was arrested said he was a" political activist" isn't evidence that brexit was the reason? Which planet are you on?

 

Firstly, Mair denies saying those things. Secondly, if he did say them, he didn't say "This is for brexit. Brexit will always come first." or "I'm a brexit activist." Thirdly, his actions were the result of his mental illness, not politics. His target could just as easily have been a completely different one.

 

I totally understand why remain wants to pin this on brexit: it has the potential to be a game changer. But it's nothing more than political ambulance chasing of the worst kind. The real issue here is how Mair slipped through the social services net. But nobody involved even wants this on the agenda.