Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 SolarCross wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Democratically working to change one's country is not "attempting to kill or overthrow the sovereign or government". You're deluded.

Right so if the hutus vote to kill all the tutsis, that wouldn't be genocide, because democracy?

Bombs or ballot boxes, the methods are secondary to the desired outcome. Treason-lite is still treason.

You're comparing apples to machine guns here, only further proving that you're completely missing the point.

just because a country is Democratic doesn't mean its our Democratic.

 Lone Cat wrote:

Asterios wrote:
i'm curious with Britain leaving will other countries follow suit and leave the Euro ? I mean before now the only country to leave the EU was Greenland, albeit Greece had talked of it, but now that Britain is allegedly doing it, will other countries follow suit? and if so where will that leave the countries that relied on their cash flush neighbors for support?

still it will take Britain years to untangle themselves from the agreements and policies and such, but it does beg one to wonder if other countries will follow suit?

AFAIK The Netherlands are considering a plebiscite whether to leave or stay with the EU. but I don't think France and Germany will follow. they represent the entire EU for so long, even the founding membership themselves, why leave?

The original purpose of the European "Project" was to bind and integrate France and Germany together to restrain German militarism and prevent the two big countries from butting heads again in future conflicts.

If they split up, then Europe is .

 SolarCross wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Democratically working to change one's country is not "attempting to kill or overthrow the sovereign or government". You're deluded.

Right so if the hutus vote to kill all the tutsis, that wouldn't be genocide, because democracy?

Bombs or ballot boxes, the methods are secondary to the desired outcome. Treason-lite is still treason.

Being democratically elected is not overthrowing the government, otherwise everyone who's ever voted against an incumbent government is a traitor.

As I said, deluded.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:


Oh, get over yourself.

It was not a "False pledge". Farage did not make the pledge. He has no responsibility for keeping it, or for holding the other Leave Campaign to account before or after the Referendum over the promises they make. He's merely given his opinion that he doesn't agree with it, because he thinks its a promise that can't be kept.

The actual people who made the pledge, the Official Leave Campaign, have not to my knowledge, recanted it.. Ergo its not (yet) a "false pledge" and you're geting your knickers in a twist for no reason. Who knows? Maybe the people who actually made the pledge will be able to keep it.

If you could just get over your hate for Farage for one moment, perhaps you could direct your ire at the people who are actually responsible.

Actually, he does if he wants to lead his campaign with any sense of intellectual honesty and to not allow the british people to be mislead. As it stands he was more concerned with winning than making sure that the british public were adequately prepared with correct information to allow them to make an informed decision.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 SolarCross wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Democratically working to change one's country is not "attempting to kill or overthrow the sovereign or government". You're deluded.

Right so if the hutus vote to kill all the tutsis, that wouldn't be genocide, because democracy?

Bombs or ballot boxes, the methods are secondary to the desired outcome. Treason-lite is still treason.

Being democratically elected is not overthrowing the government, otherwise everyone who's ever voted against an incumbent government is a traitor.

As I said, deluded.

traitors in war time are those who lost.

Easter Shrimp for all!

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
Get 'em out now. You voted, no procrastination: Activate article 50 and let's amputate the rotting limb.

This seems to be the feeling here in Portugal as well, as far as I can tell.

The thing is you are painting every British person with the same brush. Only 35% of the registered voting population (and hence there was probably some proportion missing) voted to leave, 35% wanted to stay and the other 30% didn't turn up. As such you could have at least up to 65% that don't really want to go anywhere (or just don't know).

The problems with referendums like this is that the population is not an expert in the question. It's like asking 45 million people to build you a house; there's no one that knows anything about foundations, brickwork, plumbing or electrical supplies. And generally people have a habit of believing the person that shouts the loudest. So it's not really a surprise when after it is built it is shaky.

This is what happened in the referendum a few loud issues became so dominant the crowded out all rational conversation and both sides degraded to hurling dog poop at each other.

Take immigration for example. The reason the UK needs immigration is because it simply is not having enough babies anymore to fund pensions and industry in the future. Current pensions are funded by current employees paying into a pension pot. This money is used to fund those that have already retired. It hence requires enough employed people at any one time to be paying into the system. The problem that we will have if we stopped immigration today is that in 30-40 years a significant fraction of the population will have retired, but there simply won't be enough workers to actually fund pensions - in essence either pensions are reduced significantly at that time or stopped altogether. So we need immigration.

So what about the strain on the services. Yes there is an impact but perfectly manageable; as long as you fund new trainees, pay them decent wages and don't over work them. However the UK doesn't train enough and those they do and can find better conditions in other countries. As such our services are stretched because they are underfunded. This isn't an EU issue, people would still leave to find better jobs anyway regardless of immigration or not. So what about this £350m, well firstly doctors aren't going to appear out of thin air and secondly the good ones will still leave for sunnier climes.

How about fishing quotas? Yes the EU limits fishing so we don't destroy fish stocks (like what happened at the Grand Banks which devastated the fishing stocks for years). However the actual quotas are awarded by the UK government using an archaic system that massively benefits large multinational fishing companies. The smaller one boat vessels of the type that sailed up the Thames are limited to the scraps. Again this is not an EU issue. The EU allowance is reasonable, it's the UK's allowance scheme that isn't.

And in the main most of the main issues raised by the Leave campaign were effectively created by our own government favouring big business, but they have continuously blamed other parties for what they implemented.

The only area I do agree is a result of EU mismanagement is their lack of political accountability (something us Brits do value) and the common agricultural policy (CAP) which drains 50% of the EUs fund each year but mainly gets given to the wealthiest nations' farmers. However you can't resolves these from outside of the EU.

So when arguing against the Brexit case the government just resorted to the fear of economical collapse, the sky falling and all our grass turning blue otherwise they would have to admit all the above. The economical collapse may or may not happen (volatility is expected over the first few weeks of an exit) but most people had heard so much from our government from the Chancellor that we needed to tighten our belt because the next collapse could be tomorrow (so austerity, austerity, austerity) that the population became deaf to the warnings (the chancellor that cried wolf too many times!)

In essence then many less well off people likely voted to leave because they are frustrated and angry whilst the few rich got even richer whilst the relatively poor had to fight just to keep food on the table. The establishment which had been cleverly (but now appeared foolishly) blamed this on the EU when in reality it was out own governments making.

As such the referendum gave people the opportunity to vent at the wrong institution which in the end is likely to result in the break up of the UK and possibly a worse position globally. What is almost certain though is that those who voted to get out are almost certainly going to be those that are worst off whilst you effectively have the same government that doesn't care two toots about them.

As such we should vote for our politicians at general elections and their last five year performance but let them make the technical decisions we do not fully understand the implications of.

The best we can now hope for is the Conservative party pulls itself apart allowing Labour/SNP to block leaving the EU and bring some sanity to the whole debate (and hopefully a reformed EU as well because we are not the only country that might leave in the medium to long term).

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:


Oh, get over yourself.

It was not a "False pledge". Farage did not make the pledge. He has no responsibility for keeping it, or for holding the other Leave Campaign to account before or after the Referendum over the promises they make. He's merely given his opinion that he doesn't agree with it, because he thinks its a promise that can't be kept.

The actual people who made the pledge, the Official Leave Campaign, have not to my knowledge, recanted it.. Ergo its not (yet) a "false pledge" and you're geting your knickers in a twist for no reason. Who knows? Maybe the people who actually made the pledge will be able to keep it.

If you could just get over your hate for Farage for one moment, perhaps you could direct your ire at the people who are actually responsible.

Actually, he does if he wants to lead his campaign with any sense of intellectual honesty and to not allow the british people to be mislead. As it stands he was more concerned with winning than making sure that the british public were adequately prepared with correct information to allow them to make an informed decision.

You're STILL missing the point. He did not make that pledge. He is not responsible for it. He merely disagrees with it - a promise that an entirely separate campaign made. He is under no obligation to support it, and in any case he is unlikely to be in any position to keep or break that promise. Do you really think he's going to be a prominent member of a future government?

The pledge hasn't even been proven to be False. Has the Official Leave campaign recanted it?

Trying to pin this on Farage and make out as though he is somehow responsible for something that somebody else said is fething ridiculous. People should be attacking Johnson, not Farage. Farage has done and said many things that he can and should be criticised for but this is not one of them.

This is no more than salty losers trying to get revenge on someone they dislike by framing him for a (as yet unproven) "False promise" that was in truth made by someone else entirely.

I think I'll bail for a few days. The run up, the BREXIT reaction, the constant reading of newspapers and watching of interviews/debates, has put me off politics for a few days.

Hopefully, Britain will still be around on Monday

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I think I'll bail for a few days. The run up, the BREXIT reaction, the constant reading of newspapers and watching of interviews/debates, has put me off politics for a few days.

Hopefully, Britain will still be around on Monday

Might want to go into hibernation for a few years...or decades.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I think I'll bail for a few days. The run up, the BREXIT reaction, the constant reading of newspapers and watching of interviews/debates, has put me off politics for a few days.

Hopefully, Britain will still be around on Monday

Might want to go into hibernation for a few years...or decades.

I'm just a little bit fed up of seeing a newspaper or following the latest referendum updates.

I'll be back refreshed, because leave voters like us have to watch Parliament, and stop them from ignoring the will of the people. Most of them are pro-EU.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I think I'll bail for a few days. The run up, the BREXIT reaction, the constant reading of newspapers and watching of interviews/debates, has put me off politics for a few days.

Hopefully, Britain will still be around on Monday

Might want to go into hibernation for a few years...or decades.

I'm just a little bit fed up of seeing a newspaper or following the latest referendum updates.

I'll be back refreshed, because leave voters like us have to watch Parliament, and stop them from ignoring the will of the people. Most of them are pro-EU.

Burn the lot of them and start from scratch I say. Wheres a Guy Fawkes when you need him?

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:


You're STILL missing the point. He did not make that pledge. He is not responsible for it. He merely disagrees with it - a promise that an entirely separate campaign made. He is under no obligation to support it, and in any case he is unlikely to be in any position to keep or break that promise. Do you really think he's going to be a prominent member of a future government?

The pledge hasn't even been proven to be False. Has the Official Leave campaign recanted it?

Trying to pin this on Farage and make out as though he is somehow responsible for something that somebody else said is fething ridiculous. People should be attacking Johnson, not Farage. Farage has done and said many things that he can and should be criticised for but this is not one of them.

This is no more than salty losers trying to get revenge on someone they dislike by framing him for a (as yet unproven) "False promise" that was in truth made by someone else entirely.

Was he aware of that pledge during the referendum? If yes, why did he not speak out against it as it was misleading the british public?
By allowing lies to be spread to support leaving he allowed the british public to be misinformed, damaging their ability to make an informed decision.

So I repeat my statement, Farage cared more about winning than making sure the public were given accurate information with which to make their decision. That also goes for all the other Leave side politicians and for Remain for many of their claims.

Its not a lie if the people who actually made the pledge have not recanted it. Has the official Leave campaign recanted it? How many times do I have to restate this until it sinks in?

And why do you care so much that Farage disagrees with a pledge made by the other campaign? He is not going to be in a position to keep or break a pledge made by somebody else. Its unlikely he'll be in the next government. Ergo its not "inaccurate information".

This is a fething ridiculous witch hunt.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

It was not a "False pledge". Farage did not make the pledge.

Well he did say that EU membership was costing the UK "£55 million a day" in the far off days of February so...

#project fact apparently....

Nonsense pledges and statements are par the course in British politics... As soon as people get their way these things become quite malleable (not to say the don't change with the tides before then though).

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

It was not a "False pledge". Farage did not make the pledge.

Well he did say that EU membership was costing the UK "£55 million a day" in the far off days of February so...

#project fact apparently....

Then attack him for that, something he actually said, instead of attacking him for something he did not say.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Then attack him for that,

I'd rather attack him for being a frog faced little englander.

He is an utterly despicable creature. At least he should slink back into whatever swamp he emerged from now that he has completed his mission of evil.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

It was not a "False pledge". Farage did not make the pledge.

Well he did say that EU membership was costing the UK "£55 million a day" in the far off days of February so...

#project fact apparently....

Then attack him for that, something he actually said, instead of attacking him for something he did not say.

"Our campaign to Leave the EU is based on fact. It costs £55million every single day to be a member of this European Union. " Nigel Farage, the Express, 8 February 2016.

It's tricky I know, but £55m a day is in fact slightly more than £350m a week. I find the attempt to defend what is a quite purposeful and sustained (and successful) attempt to mislead the electorate rather amusing (or would be, if he hadn't shagged my country).

I guarantee you the Leave side will continue to have problems as their fantasy economics collides with reality over the coming months. No wonder it's mainly the ill-educated part of the electorate who fell for their snake-oil.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Its not a lie if the people who actually made the pledge have not recanted it. Has the official Leave campaign recanted it? How many times do I have to restate this until it sinks in?

And why do you care so much that Farage disagrees with a pledge made by the other campaign? He is not going to be in a position to keep or break a pledge made by somebody else. Its unlikely he'll be in the next government. Ergo its not "inaccurate information".

This is a fething ridiculous witch hunt.

I care because I like to think that big decisions which will shape our country for years to come should be based on accurate information. I also think that someone who has campaigned on the basis of giving ordinary people a voice should have enough integrity to make sure that those people have that correct information. It is inaccurate information. We never paid £350m per week. It was an outright lie.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Then attack him for that,

I'd rather attack him for being a frog faced little englander.

So you admit, this is a personal witch hunt from people who just hate Farage?

Anyway, I always find it ironic when people call those who want British independence "Little Englanders". England has never been so little as it is now, a province in a nascent European empire.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

So you admit, this is a personal witch hunt from people who just hate Farage?

No, I admit that I despise the man and that virtually everything that comes out of his mouth is at best a half truth bit I am just 1 man.....

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Anyway, I always find it ironic when people call those who want British independence "Little Englanders".

Seems apt to me

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Its not a lie if the people who actually made the pledge have not recanted it. Has the official Leave campaign recanted it? How many times do I have to restate this until it sinks in?

And why do you care so much that Farage disagrees with a pledge made by the other campaign? He is not going to be in a position to keep or break a pledge made by somebody else. Its unlikely he'll be in the next government. Ergo its not "inaccurate information".

This is a fething ridiculous witch hunt.

I care because I like to think that big decisions which will shape our country for years to come should be based on accurate information. I also think that someone who has campaigned on the basis of giving ordinary people a voice should have enough integrity to make sure that those people have that correct information. It is inaccurate information. We never paid £350m per week. It was an outright lie.

Oh FFS. You're moving the goalposts and changing topics.

We were arguing about the allegation that Farage is backtracking on the pledge to take the EU "£350million" and give it to the NHS, not whether that original "£350 million" figure is accurate or not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

So you admit, this is a personal witch hunt from people who just hate Farage?

No, I admit that I despise the man and that virtually everything that comes out of his mouth is at best a half truth bit I am just 1 man.....

So...thats a yes?

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

So...thats a yes?

Am I people?

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Its not a lie if the people who actually made the pledge have not recanted it. Has the official Leave campaign recanted it? How many times do I have to restate this until it sinks in?

And why do you care so much that Farage disagrees with a pledge made by the other campaign? He is not going to be in a position to keep or break a pledge made by somebody else. Its unlikely he'll be in the next government. Ergo its not "inaccurate information".

This is a fething ridiculous witch hunt.

I care because I like to think that big decisions which will shape our country for years to come should be based on accurate information. I also think that someone who has campaigned on the basis of giving ordinary people a voice should have enough integrity to make sure that those people have that correct information. It is inaccurate information. We never paid £350m per week. It was an outright lie.

Oh FFS. You're moving the goalposts and changing topics.

We were arguing about the allegation that Farage is backtracking on the pledge to take the EU "£350million" and give it to the NHS, not whether that original "£350 million" figure is accurate or not.

Actually, if you read back, my post was always about how he should have denounced the £350m figure as misleading during the campaign so that the public could base their decision on fact, not fiction.

And that applies to all sides of the debate, not just Farage but he's the one swanning about the place and calling for this to be a public holiday.

No, I admit that I despise the man and that virtually everything that comes out of his mouth is at best a half truth bit I am just 1 man.....

[insert joke about salty losers here].

The best we can now hope for is the Conservative party pulls itself apart allowing Labour/SNP to block leaving the EU and bring some sanity to the whole debate (and hopefully a reformed EU as well because we are not the only country that might leave in the medium to long term).

Probably not, the Blairites in the Labour Party are making a bid to backstab Corbyn for not campaigning hard enough.

So, Boris Johnson will most likely win the general election later this year after the blairites kick out Corbyn and replace him with a wet blanket that nobody wants to vote for.

Also, Scotland won't vote Labour because the SNP exists, making a Tory landslide in the general election later this year a near certainty.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

[insert joke about salty losers here].

Given that I am Scottish nationalist the joke will soon be on you

As I read the many comments posted, especially those that take issue with the validity of the referendum or seek ways to usurp or countermand it I am reminded of the following;

“Elections have consequences,” and, in case there was any doubt, “I won.” - President Obama

I would like to say as a citizen of a state that seems to come across a bit shall we say "independently minded", I take the Brexit vote as something courageous, irrespective of the result.

Though many criticize Cameron personally for the decision to endorse and organize the referendum, the fortitude to put such a question to the poeple is undeniably enviable. It renews my faith in democratic ideals especially from a backdrop where in my country, we seem to go inevitably from popular vote, to bureaucratic rule making, to litigation when the popular vote fails to achieve the desired outcome.

Democracy can certainly be messy ,and yes the majority is not always right, but Huzzah for the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland for showing the rest of the world real democracy in action.