That’s semantics though. The gross figure is still £350m, the rebate is taken out of that. But even the rebate plus public sector receipts still amounts to less than what France receives in public sector receipts alone. So I still don’t see that it’s misleading as a gross figure I’m afraid.

The debate your making here is along the lines of someone saying they get paid £40k per year because their annual salary is £40,000, but in reality income tax and NI is taken out of that before they ever receive it, so is it a lie to say they get paid £40k per year? I don’t think most people would see that as a lie, since tax and NI is a given, as is the rebate and public sector receipts. And bear in mind that that £350m figure doesn’t include remittances, overseas child benefit payments, subsidisation of students at UK universities, EU prisoners in UK jails and others costs like burdening of infrastructure and cost of regulations to business.

No, sorry but you are muddle headed over this, as are most anti-EU people over this figure which has been entirely discredited. The real problem is the word SEND that you used and was on the side of the bus.
Your £40k salary analogy is ar@se about T@t. A much better analogy is the one in the lnk set out above, if you had read it you might have understood.
the cost to the UK and the rebate is actually more closely analogous to going into a car dealer and buying a car in a showroom. The list price is £35000, but you negotiate a £9000 discount. You then owe £26000 and pay it. You don’t send them £35000 and they then give you back the £9000.You never contracted to send the car company £35000 so at no point have you actually owed £35000, nor could you say by NOT buying the car that you have SAVED £35000 or have taken back control of your £35000.
nobody assumes a cars list price is the price actually paid do they?

Unfortunately for you and the Torybrexitgraph he didn’t actually say those words….
https://fullfact.org/europe/mark-carney-brexit-golden-age/
the main thust of the speech was suggesting global growth is faltering
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/speech/2019/the-global-outlook-speech-by-mark-carney.pdf?la=en&hash=6725EA590D46F11FBFDFF4744E4E90158D4BCECE#page=19

An interesting speech delivered at UCL, taking all sides to task, but some prominent brexshyters get a special mention

http://www.6dock.com/2019/01/22/mps-…r-ivan-rogers/

It would also appear that many no deal pro brexit commentators don’t do their research properly
https://inews.co.uk/news/james-delin…-brexit-video/

if you want to see the full crash and burn….
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RWTlv8NLrfU

Oh Dear, it seems the Daily Fail’s website has been rumbled https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-46976834 Can’t see them wriggling out of it tbh

Re. #2816
the source is not exactly reliable, and yo only have to read the comments below it to realise who his fan base are.
as Wiki says about Felix Lace and the BPS :
“which is one among countless examples that show you don’t need to be educated, honest, or careful about the sources that back up your claims to be profitable when you say things people like to hear”
“It turns out that much of the work Lace does is actually just reading the words of other people in a flashy animation. YouTuber Kraut and Tea exposed Black Pigeon Speaks as a plagiarist. Lace composed his script by cutting and pasting the words of other people together in a single script, and then read those words verbatim.”

in other words gullable people view his stuff and he gets paid

Two Alternative petitions to consider, for balance. Just shows that in all probability there is not a majority on any position, either in parliament nor, I suspect, the country any more
the second is currently live

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/223729
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/232984

Again you are deliberately missing the point, or perhaps it went over your head.
Singling out selective information in the way that your chosen video presenters have with the deliberate intention of using criminality by a selective (and tiny) proportion of a group and then leading to insinuation that all members of that group are therefore undesirable is poor logic even when such behaviour is proven and reprehensible.
Presenting ‘facts’ in such a way that indicates your dislike of a religion and are intended to encourage others to the same viewpoint is still islamaphobic, or anti-semitic, or anti-christian etc. etc.
If such as selective perspective spotlight was shone on any individual or small groups of any population following the same false logic it could be argued that any group is undesirable.
For example, cyclists. If you read the comments after the numerous articles on cyclists in the Daily Heil as an example, (although the same can be found in the Express, Sun, local newspapers etc. Etc) you could be lead to the conclusion that all cyclists are wicked and that the vast majority of the population believe that they should be allowed to drive them off the road. Yet this is patently false on both counts. There are some idiot cyclists, but not every cyclist is an idiot and not everyone believes they should be taken off the roads.
So, in conclusion I don’t need to debunk them as it is not simply the material but the presentation and emphasis that is offensive.
As far as the suggestion that christian scandals are more likely to be brought to the fore than other religions this is simly a blinkered veiwpoint. Scandals from 40 plus years ago are only just being brought to light because of the coverups from the establishment within churches and outside them. If you want to believe that narrative, you will find evidence to support it . It is called confirmation bias.