At the moment Parliament seems hellbent on achieving a deal that has none of the benefits of being in the EU and none of the benefits of leaving it either. A ‘quid pro no’ if you will.
Yes, the Nazis didn’t start by marching down the road in jackboots, and when I studied history no Jews had been gassed in the early 30’s, yet that changed….. If you’re happy enough to be flippant about the viciousness in evidence, then that says a lot about you.
You’re being a drama queen. Anger at politicians has nothing to do with targeting a specific race. In 1930s Germany any people expressing anger at politicians would have been dispensed with in short order.
I think the real campaign lie was by the two main parties who both ran a campaign based on Brexit in the last election, when they were actually nearly all Remainers.
April the first? fanboyism to that deree is collector!
Look like MiG-17s are now using active cancellation too, look:eagerness::
2019 Apr 01
STEALTH MiG-17 FIRST FLIGHT
Legendary Russian aircraft Manufacturer, Mikoyan Gurevich, unveiled the Stealth MiG-17 at its plant in Nizhny Novgorod.
According to UAC representative, Bolshoy Khleb, the MiG-17 Stealth is not the same aircraft that dominated American fighters over the skies of Vietnam.
Instead, Khleb states that this is an evolutionary model, utilizing the same materials as the Su-57.
While it is unknown whether the MiG-17 stealth will be adopted into Russian service, Chief designer, Dr. Seksualnaya Zadnista, indicated that the aircraft will be produced for exports.
‘ There are may countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America that want a 5th generation aircraft but can’t afford them. This aircraft will fill that special niche and can compete well against more expensive jets from China or the west. Although the airframe is classical, the materials are the same as the Su-57. Additionally, our aircraft emits zero radar signals, making it difficult to intercept’
go on, show us a photo from the Remain march with an “Antifa” flag
As for post #3063
give it up St. john, the £350m is a busted flush, an outright fallacy and you know it deep down
Does it matter whether they were there or not? They support the Remain position and that’s all that matters.
Not one bit. The £350m was just the gross amount for the direct payment. If you add up remittances, keeping EU convicts in UK prisons, overseas benefit payments, cost to businesses of legislation and illegal labour and subsidisation of EU student at UK universities, it comes to well over £350m/week.
Hi All,
Unfortunately both sides of the argument have attracted radicals to each IMPO, it just ruins the core of what the referendum decided sadly, if no deal is to be made then let’s just leave simple. The UK can always survive by making alternative deals separately with individual countries, the only reason the EU do not want the UK to leave is because of the financial contribution this country gives IMPO.
Why should we be governed by unelected ministers that enforce they’re Rules/Regulations and Laws ? that are abused I mean we cannot kick European criminals back home because it is they’re human right to be here even if they break the law never mind the justice system in the UK being a joke. Before anybody screams whatever just imagine your the victim of someone who has no right to be in this country, dare I say experiences a family members loss of life etc. etc. you may think differently.
Also I will point out that I am in no affiliation with any group political party etc.etc.etc. just a plain speaker who thinks enough is enough!
Geoff.
There’s the financial contribution but also the amount of their goods we import. And yes hidden costs like keeping EU criminals in UK prisons, remittances, overseas benefits payments and subsidisation of EU students at UK universities add up. The £350m/week is actually too low as a value.
The flag of the fascist, white supremacist movement Generation Identity being flown proudly on the Leave Means Leave demo in Parliament Square today.The Christchurch shooter donated €1,500 to the organisation before massacring 50 people
Not a compelling argument there St John, “nobody has a clue what being outside of the EU means” (although the extreme incompetence past 3 years have given us quite a clue, and whilst leavers have some strange issue with acknowledging experience and intellect and knowledge, do you knew what, industry leaders, medical experts, heads of banks are actually best placed to advise), and to wait 20 – 40 years (and lose £zillions and face an irretrievable experience and world renowned leadership) to “see what it is like” (no thank you!, not a great business case, and when we see it’s a pile of cr@p, what is the recourse option (bar invent a time machine).
As for winding the clock back, to particular votes/decisions, in reality the temperature of the country needs to be taken now, what do people want now, faced with the facts of now, not what happened 5 10 or 30 years ago….. or if that’s the case then let’s go back to the 1860’s – 1880’s when the “commoners” got the vote or 1918 when “non-householders” got the vote and rescind those and then have another vote?
I disagree, nobody has put together and implemented a comprehensive no deal Brexit plan yet, which would definitely take back control even if nothing else. Nobody has seen what that’s like. Why see what it’s like? Well we gave up trading ties with Australia, New Zealand and Canada to see what the EU was like. If we hadn’t done that we’d likely not only have sovereignty but we’d also have a better deal with the EU based on actual mutual benefit, rather than the one being offered which is based on their butthurt and concerns over the longevity of the EU as an institution.
I disagree. It’s because a 2-1-sided ‘democracy’ has been played in favour of ‘furthering the EU’ that we’ve ended up at this precipice. I’d honestly be sorely tempted even to have left without a vote given that we got here without a vote. Why should democracy only be trampled on going in one direction and not the other? What’s basically happened over the last 40 years is equivalent to stuffing someone’s house to the brim with dog crap without their consent and then asking them to vote on whether they still want the house. And then when they answer ‘no’ having the bare-faced cheek to suggest they should change their mind. And that last bit is important. Even giving a second vote is basically the elites suggesting that people should change their mind. They have no right to do that.
I also love how you subtly suggest that Brexit is because people you consider lesser than yourself got the vote, e.g. commoners and non-householders. Well I am a householder and I still despise your attitude.
“I seem to recall 17+ million voting for Brexit and 16 million voting against, so all the above above proves is that 5 million of the 16 million are literate, which is a poor show for the other 11 million if you ask me”
That was 3 years ago, this is now, in which several million of the electorate has now dies, and several million people have joined the electorate. Also, I think you’ll find people are far more informed now of all the things the EU do and what our membership means and they can see through the lies and scams that were presented to them as fact and benefits. Evidence shows that illiteracy and lack of intellect belongs predominantly to the leavers.
So, if Brexit is still rainbow lit, unicorn inhabited sunny uplands there’ll be nothing to worry about with a second vote………. Or are you scared reality has dawned?
UK politicians signed off on the Lisbon Treaty but then they realised nobody wants it, and we had a change of government since then, but guess what? There was no re-vote, no chance to undo that. So why should every single crap policy and treaty of the EU be completely irrevocable from a British perspective but Brexit isn’t? We never got a first vote on Lisbon, Maastricht or the European Parliament Act, and our politicians never got a second vote on them, but for some reason Brexit should be voted on over and over again until we get the decision that Remainers want.
You say, “blah blah blah, it’s because the decision to leave can’t be changed easily,” well neither can the decision to stay. In fact, without any doubt, they would never give us a referendum to leave ever again after this. We only got this referendum because Remain expected to win easily. The other problem is that nobody actually has a clue what being out of the EU is like yet. Sure, there are predictions and projections by people who’ve been wrong before, but nobody actually knows. So no, there shouldn’t be a second vote until a suitable period of time has elapsed in order for people to be aware of what being out of the EU is like, e.g. 20-40 years after we actually leave. If the EU is as great as you think it will still be there in 40 years time, so no need to worry.
If Leavers didn’t know what they were voting for, then Remainers didn’t know what they were voting against and nobody has a clue what the EU will look like in 30 years either, just as nobody did in 1989. The main reason people voted out is because they wanted laws affecting UK people to be made in the UK, and fully leaving the EU will achieve that, so they did know what they were voting for. They also voted leave because they generally don’t like the EU as it is and this is also a known. Remainers mainly voted to stay because they felt the economy would be better inside the EU but they do not know that for an absolute fact. They voted against leaving because they felt it would be worse. They don’t know that either though. Therefore it was Remainers who didn’t really know what they were voting for or against.
I think it’s fair to say that with nearly 5 million people signing a petition and 2 million marching through London from all areas of the UK (that’s 2 million more than Nigel’s ramble) it’s no longer the will of the people.
I seem to recall 17+ million voting for Brexit and 16 million voting against, so all the above above proves is that 5 million of the 16 million are literate, which is a poor show for the other 11 million if you ask me.
How about we catch our breath, we are, after all fully 3 years on from the referendum, and hold a people’s vote on where we are now, faced with far more facts, 3 years on. Vote for what we want as a nation, all people impacted can vote, no-deal exit, negotiated exit and future relationship, and remain. Surely nobody can argue with that, the most compelling plan to the people will get the most votes.
If leave has a compelling argument it will win, same goes for deal and remain.
You can’t simply barrage people into submission by forcing a vote on the same damn thing over and over, the House Speaker has already ruled against that at parliamentary level and I don’t see why it should be any different at national level. The requirement for another vote should be that the EU fundamentally changes in terms of its relationship with the UK. We never had any vote on the European Parliament Act, or the Maastricht Treaty, or the Lisbon Treaty. We got here without any votes, so the fact we needed a vote to leave at all is overkill.
Nobody is going to fall for a 3 choice divide and conquer strategy either. You must think people are stupid.
How about we go back and have a vote on the European Parliament Act, the Maastricht Treaty, the Lisbon Treaty and A8+A2 expansion first. Unless they all get 50%, then we are out by default yes? This is the hypocrisy of the Remainer, a problem has been created undemocratically by leaders elected with far less than 50% of the popular vote and far less than 419 constituencies who never even mentioned their intentions at EU level during their campaigns and now we somehow need double democracy to undo that which was not created democratically in the first place.
Being wrong and making a mistake is one thing. Deliberately deceiving is another and deserves to be prosecuted with the full force of the law.
I think if you are passing the research off as being somehow scientifically or mathematically based then it’s just as misleading. Equally has the Remain campaigner who said that the only money Northern Ireland gets is from the EU been punished?
It’s amazing how high the voting standards are for leaving the EU, but they were nowhere near as high for say The Lisbon Treaty, or The Maastricht Treaty, or The European Parliament Act of 1979. All these things were signed by governments with no popular majority even in much lower turnouts and had nothing like 419 out of 650 constituencies and didn’t even mention what they intended doing at the EU level when campaigning. The Lisbon Treaty was even rejected when it was still called the EU Constitution. If the Leave vote doesn’t meet people’s standards then the means by which we got here in the first place can’t possibly get anywhere near those standards and henceforth, applying those standards retrospectively means we should leave by default anyway.
Sign In
