trekbusterRe #363
More scaremongering using half-truths and flights of fantasy.
As is so often the case on that particular “Conservative” website, all is not as they would suggest. It is not about “anti-EU” rhetoric, it is about content that is already designated as illegal and I am surprised that they are so against provision that is intended to counter terrorism.
The one MEP they quote is a failed UKIP member who was expelled for bringing the party into disrepute. Hardly an unbiased observer as she is in the far right “Europe of Nations and freedom” allaince within the EU parlaiment.
trekbusterBrexsists in exaggeration mode shocker
Chris Grayling ‘ the channel could turn into the Mediterranean’ Please!
Typical of the brexsists and their lackeys in the Right Wing Press to make such a big deal of 18 Albanians*, with the implication from Chris Graying that leaving Europe will sort this all out. why has this come up in the press now when almost certainly this traffic has been happening for a while? Spin of course
They will also know that the Channel is much easier to police than the Eastern Mediteranean for geographical and geopolitical reasons if the effort was made. He has been part of a government that has reduced the effectiveness of the border force so that part at least is (typical)hypocritical hyperbole
A swallow does not a summer make, a point well made here:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/30/two-boatloads-albanian-migrants-not-an-invasion-britain
It could be cogently argued that leaving the EU will make this ‘problem’ worse as it is extremely unlikely that there will be fewer people attempting to reach Britain illegally afterward.
As such it is not directly relevant to the EU citizen free movement debate, however hard they try and link the two
*before anyone suggests I am condoning illegal immigration, of course I do not
trekbusterTony,
No bubbles were burst during this production
I am well aware of that, do you think that Clarkson et al didn’t ?!? ( answer, yes they did and will do so again on their Amazon show) but:
1. Its the Daily Fail I mean, come on get, a better link than that
2. I have seen other clips of his driving and he is at least as useful as Clarkson ever was, it is just that he is dipping out for insurance at what his minders might regard as the scary bits
edit: and at least he has been honest about it unlike some others
trekbusterI thought M LB was quite good- he certainly can drive well and the piece about the Ariel Nomad made me want to get one……if only I had a spare £33k to drop on a toy.
Evans? nah
They should get Chris Harris to front it rather than just doing the BBC3 extra show( which was OK – well certainly less shouty)
trekbusterYou won’t find any/many contradictions there.
:):):):):)
The strange thing is you probably actually believe this
trekbusterAh, John, you imply you never said the thing I paraphrased. A senior moment?
It isn’t honest. It is a bully. It is overbearing. It is corrupt. It lies, cheats and steals. It bends the rules, such as they are, to suit its purpose. It promotes incompetence. It recruits the spineless yes men of our age. We should have no part of it.
On to the topic in hand.
I have just heard Andrew tyrie chairman of the Treasury Select committee laying into both sides economic claims, but particular scorn was aimed at the £350m per week claim plastered on the Brexitbus. I think ‘completely bogus’ were the words used. It follows a unamimous report saying much the same by the committee which includes Jacob Rees-Mogg. So the latter agrees the figure is incorrect, which is surprising but welcome.
Andrew Tyrie suggested that the bus should be resprayed
trekbusterOr as the Torygraph put it:
“Is this the Brexit campaigns’ oddest claim yet?”
Very tongue in cheek I think, with a telling phrase in the article
What remarkable news. And how extraordinary that this is the first we’ve heard of it.
trekbusterRe: #337
To answer your assertion about cycling on pavements.
I don’t do it, ever.
So no I don’t understand. It is facinating that you are happy to break the law when it suits you. Or perhaps to paraphrase your own stated position on the EU ‘you bend the rules, Such as they are, when it suits your purpose’
Cycling on the footway (pavement) is an offence under Section 72 of the Highways Act 1835 as amended by Section 85 (1) of the Local Government Act 1888. you will be liable for a Fixed Penalty Notice of £30 for each offence
If you were not aware of the law, I am afraid ignorance is no excuse.
And people wonder why cyclists in general have a bad name when it is really a small minority who ruin it for everyone else.
But back to the debate in hand.
trekbusterRe #331
I thought you were a cyclist as well John, at least I remember you saying you and your wife rode on pavements to get from place to place (which,by the way, is illegal). So that, by your own stereotyping, would probably make you and your wife ‘tree hugging lefties’
Not for the first time you have missed the point I was tying to make (too subtle, again)
I was just trying to point out, again, that if you restrict your impresion of the whole population and their views on by your own definition a very narrow selection you will get a false impression. You say your contacts are ‘fairly representitive’ Representitive of what exactly? I freely admit that my group of friends tend to have very similar views to my own, isn’t that always the case? But I at least don’t make the mistake of assuming everyone must be like them. The polls, for what they are worth, show this.
The poll I quoted is merely representative of a portion who could be bothered to vote on that particular forum, which by the way has well over a thousand users not all active. It is not a road bike forum by the way, so no lycra and pointy helmets to be seen. The fact that it is not what you might want to hear makes no difference. I just used it as an example to show there are other opinions.
trekbusterare you absolutely sure about your Dozen John? are you applying a little wishful thinking?
What follows is not intended to be oneupmanship on numbers but is true none the less
Of the thirty or so people I have spoken with on this subject recently, in my cycling group, at work, at a party, etc. three or four have expressed a clear intention to vote out, twenty or so have expressed a clear intention to stay in, the rest not yet sure. I am well aware that some may not be being honest about their true intentions but were perhaps following the general consensus to keep their heads down.
In my immediate family, about 10 people altogether, a diametrically opposite view to yours has emerged. None have expressed an intention to vote out, but again Some may have been ‘soft leavers’ none of us can be sure as it is a secret ballot.
On a cycling forum I frequent, they have just had a straw poll this afternoon and of the 100 separate people who expressed a view, 74 were remain, 16 leave the rest not yet sure
trekbusterThere are a lot of passionate posts for/against on this forum and many others, and much of the media content for weeks has been about the referendum.
However, I have just checked again and we still have had just one leaflet from a pro-Brexit campaign.However it was not from the official leave campaign as it was before they were chosen and anyway it was a different lot (can’t remember exactly who as it went in the bin straight away)
We have had two pro-Remain leaflets and the ‘official’ UK govt. one, but again I don’t think either of the former were from the official remain group. All the leaflets have come through the post, not hand delivered
My question is, therefore, where is all the money being spent?
No one has come knocking on the door, no leaflets through the letterbox, no phone calls about it. There are no pro/anti posters in any windows, there are no billboards in farmers fields.
Nothing, nada, niente, zip.
Indeed if one didn’t watch the TV or listen to the radio or read newspapers either in hardcopy or on line, one could be oblivious to the referendum.
That would suggest no one is passionate enough about it to go and campaign face to face in our locality ( and of course I include myself in that group).
trekbusterHmmmm,
Seems the Sunday Fail at least, if not the Daily Heil, is starting to trim its cloth away from the Outers. Two articles distinctly different in tone to what has been before today on their website
In another car crash of an interview an Outer gets caught telling more porkies on the Andrew Marr show
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/penny-mordaunt-andrew-marr-uk-veto-tory-minister-accused-of-flat-out-lying-over-turkey-joining-the-a7041956.html
I guess she had been poorly briefed and her argument should have been that in the complex politics of the migrant issue, including the very remote possibility that Turkey might leave NATO if not allowed in ( according to David Owen today) it is quite likely that Turkey might gain entry at some point, when all of the conditions are met…… But just told an untruth instead.
She also said that Remain was ‘an establishment stitch up’.
Oh the irony, coming from the Armed Forces minister of HM government
trekbusterIt’s what happens when you tell exaggerated porkies.
It’s Pob who has been been caught out telling porkies
Reality check No1
Reality check No.2
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36345081
trekbusterFT apparently reporting that Vote Leave are wooing Asian voters by saying more room for them and their families if EU citizens are prevented from entering ( I’m paraphrasing, but that’s the jist)
Facinating
trekbusterApologies for taking the thread even further off-track: did the Vimy replica ever fly into/out of Old Warden? Is there enough room for it (or hypothetical future Vimy) to operate from there?
Yes she flew in ( sedately). I was there to take some photos but can’t place them at the moment. She did not display IIRC but I think refueled and left (slowly)
Sign In
