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.
Nah. Deer are more closely related to cows (same Order - Artiodactyla) than horses. Deer are actually closer related to whales and dolphins than they are to horses.
Is it true that the horse was safe to eat? I had heard that the problem was that horses that are not going to be eaten can be given different antibiotics to animals that are going to be eaten which remain in the tissue and could cause some health impacts (probably nothing major in a small, one off dose) but perhaps that was just a worry that was reported as a fact?
Da Boss wrote: Is it true that the horse was safe to eat? I had heard that the problem was that horses that are not going to be eaten can be given different antibiotics to animals that are going to be eaten which remain in the tissue and could cause some health impacts (probably nothing major in a small, one off dose) but perhaps that was just a worry that was reported as a fact?
The horse meat was sold by a Romanian company correctly labelled as horse to a Cypriot company, who in turn sold it to a Dutch company then to a French company.
It was the French company that changed the labelling to beef setting the fraud in motion.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: it's clear to see that British and Irish people don't take too kindly to our four legged friends being eaten
Don't try to speak for everyone, I don't have an issue with horsemeat. As pointed out, it was safe to eat and sold in other countries, the issue wasn't with safety standards but with packaging.
This is Britain. We cheer on horses at the Grand National. We don't stick them on our plates for Sunday lunch.
Is nothing sacred anymore?
If we supposedly cared about horses that much, we'd have dumped that race years ago for how many horses end up lame or killed by the end of it.
I do wonder if those hedges they jump over are necessary.
And I know I’m going on but I really feel that we need to go EFTA. I’d contact my MP but he’s in Sinn Fein and thus he doesn’t attend parliament so he’s a waste of space.
I have no core objection to eating horses, or dogs. I wouldn't eat a dog myself, though I would eat a horse. I wouldn't like to see other people eating dogs, like in Korea (though apparently it's declining.) In Peru people eat Guinea Pigs. Is there a law against eating dogs or Guinea Pigs in the UK?
However this isn't the point. The point is that people have the right to know the ingredients in the food they buy.
I doubt that membership of the EU increases the chance of dodgy labelling.
This is Britain. We cheer on horses at the Grand National. We don't stick them on our plates for Sunday lunch.
I've never even watched the Grand National, let alone cheered anyone on in it. Granted I've never eaten horse, let alone for Sunday lunch (preference is lamb) but I don't find the idea inherently repellent.
You make a lot of assumptions about Britain and the British, don't you?
And I know I’m going on but I really feel that we need to go EFTA.
I said (in work) the day after the referendum that nobody who felt strongly about it on either side was going to get what they wanted and we'd end up circling back to this Norway-style fudge (can we market that?) where we are in an objectively worse situation than the status quo.
From a pro-Brexit perspective it might also be the only thing that doesn't see fervent campaigns in 10 years for another chance to go back in, as we'll still have most of the benefits everyday people care about (mainly the free movement I guess) and hopefully it'll keep the economy from diving off a cliff.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/23 13:30:40
“Good people are quick to help others in need, without hesitation or requiring proof the need is genuine. The wicked will believe they are fighting for good, but when others are in need they’ll be reluctant to help, withholding compassion until they see proof of that need. And yet Evil is quick to condemn, vilify and attack. For Evil, proof isn’t needed to bring harm, only hatred and a belief in the cause.”
You make a lot of assumptions about Britain and the British, don't you?
Yes.
I've lived on this island on and off for decades (plus a few spells in Europe).
And I've been everywhere from Land's End to John O'Groats, Carlisle to Canterbury, Dundee to Derby etc etc
I like to think I know something about Britain.
I'll be the first to admit I've seen a lot of strange things.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
And yet you keep making inaccurate assumptions and claims. Whatever you "like to think".
“Good people are quick to help others in need, without hesitation or requiring proof the need is genuine. The wicked will believe they are fighting for good, but when others are in need they’ll be reluctant to help, withholding compassion until they see proof of that need. And yet Evil is quick to condemn, vilify and attack. For Evil, proof isn’t needed to bring harm, only hatred and a belief in the cause.”
Some might think that going EFTA is a fudge. It...is a little bit. But I’ve researched it and it does turn out that we’d have more autonomy than you might think. Crucially, and this is what sold it me, ever further intergration would be put to an end, and I wouldn’t have that dagger hanging over my head. It could lead to reduced costs in membership fees. Plus, we would gain control of the fisheries policy again and if I remember correctly there’s some flexiblity with the customs union too. Oh, and the immigration break without reliance on the others.
If the EFTA is the room outside the EU’s office then it makes sense to go there first rather than say...jumping out the window. Also, I understand that some of the EFTA members are not happy with the current arrangement. That is actually a good thing imo. There’s an opportunity there, if they’ll have us. Again, we’d have to persuade Norway to let us in, but I think that could be done.
I was looking at the EFTA option during the referendum but I fell for the government by fax myth. It’s not strictly true.
I said (in work) the day after the referendum that nobody who felt strongly about it on either side was going to get what they wanted and we'd end up circling back to this Norway-style fudge (can we market that?) where we are in an objectively worse situation than the status quo.
From a pro-Brexit perspective it might also be the only thing that doesn't see fervent campaigns in 10 years for another chance to go back in, as we'll still have most of the benefits everyday people care about (mainly the free movement I guess) and hopefully it'll keep the economy from diving off a cliff.
Yes. In my view as a Remainer I would prefer to be in the room and winning, since Britain is a playa in the EU, but it's certainly better to be sitting in the lobby with a right of consultation, than in the road outside pimping for rough trade.
But does the EFTA position solve the Northern Ireland border issue? My understanding is that there are customs checks at the Norway-Sweden border.
I think the trick is to still put the boarder in the Irish Sea. Since NI is our only land boarder we need to be flexible. It’s just a pity May give the DUP a big mouth in which to shout with. The ports can be configured to do customs checks there, and I don’t mind flashing my passport either.
Isn’t it telling that I, just sitting here on my iPad, figured this out better than the politicians and civil service? FFS.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/23 14:43:31
There's a lot of politicians and civil servants who knew all of this all along, but a relatively small number of Hardcore Brexiteers in the Tory Party have been biasing the whole process.
It doesn't help that Hew Majesty's Loyal Opposition can see a clear way to oppose things.
That's why there is so much kickback from the House of Lords. They are doing the job the Commons is supposed to do.
Brexiters' favoured customs union proposal could cost businesses up to £20bn, the head of HM Revenues & Customs has warned.
And while Theresa May's preferred option would cost a fraction of that, it could take up to five years to implement.
Jon Thompson, chief executive of HMRC, confirmed that the new customs partnership - in which the UK collects tariffs on behalf of Brussels for goods that are travelling via the UK on their way to the EU - could take five years before it is up and ready.
The “maximum facilitation” option, which allows so-called “trusted traders” to cross the Northern Ireland and other EU borders freely after Brexit, aided by technology, could take three years to deploy.
Although there could be a functioning border by January 2021, but not "fully optimal" as foreign ports might not be ready, he told the Treasury Select Committee.
Another issue is that repayment mechanisms might not be in place, not least because businesses would want to wait for a while to see whether reclaiming money under the customs partnership proposal would be worthwhile.
Thompson said it was "quite difficult" to give an exact deadline for when a decision was needed on which option would be taken forward, although told chair Nicky Morgan: "The quicker we get a decision, the quicker we can implement what the government wants".
Jim Harra, deputy chief executive, pointed out that the options "do require third parties to start to act, and they will not do so just because a minister tells them to do so".
Working on the basis of 200m trade consignments each year, at £32.50 per customs declaration, the “max fac” system could cost business between £17bn and £20bn.
If the UK were to cut all tariffs on goods to zero, the maximum amount that British firms would have to pay would be £3.4bn, Thompson said.
The new customs partnership would cost would be £700m to set up, he said, although added that ultimately it could be cost-neutral because firms would get a refund.
However both options as currently envisaged have been rejected by Brussels, and there is no consensus even within Cabinet, where the deadlock has forced May to put forward a backstop solution of a temporary extension to the customs union.
Pro-Brexit MP Bim Afomlami said the figures should give ministers pause for thought.
"Leaving the customs union is the right policy, but whatever the solution we come up with must not be hugely costly and burdensome to British business. That would not be a good outcome," he told City A.M.
..so might cost us £20 Billion a year and will not be ready in time anyway.
Oh both ideas have already been rejected anyway.
Downing Street says HMRC estimate that max fac Brexit customs option could cost businesses £20bn is “speculation”.
.. welll yes, it is.
obviously.
So the Govt, which gave the tax dept. about £260M or so and 5,000 or so extra staff staff to explore this stuff…..doesn’t know what it’s talking about ?
But Boris Johnson -- of Garden bridge fame -- who has also done no research -- says this isn't true.
Just like he denies Carney's claim that we've all about £900 a year worse off already -- which is actually worse than the OMG ITS PROJECT FEAR 1111 numbers that were bandied about.
Son we're left with two systems Theresa May is considering to replace the customs union, one HMRC say would cost businesses up to £200bn over ten years, and the other ministers believe could be illegal.
Worst of all this info has been around since August, more or less, last year ... and not one minister has raised this issue ?
The EU Commission is asking for authority to open negotiations with WTO members on dividing post-Brexit agricultural tariff quotas between the UK and EU27
Whilst our pro brexit MEPS are busy doing..
Spoiler:
.. which is really quite something.
Some people might take some minor issues with things like those numbers being absolute gak -- that works out at about 6.3 million migrants a year.
Parliament and its Select Committees have contributed to delusions. They have made almost no serious investigation of what preparations to be a third country under EU law should be and what steps are being taken to achieve it.
A small faction of pro-Brexit MPs (which also nearly destroyed Vote Leave so they could babble about ‘Global Britain’ in TV debates) could have done one useful thing — forced the government to prepare for their official policy. Instead this faction has instead spent its time trying to persuade people that all talk of ‘preparations’ is a conspiracy of Brussels and Heywood. They were an asset to Remain in the referendum and they’ve helped sink a viable policy since. A party that treats this faction (or Dominic Grieve) as a serious authority on the law deserves everything it gets. (I don’t mean ‘the ERG’ — I mean a subset of the ERG.)
All this contributes to current delusional arguments over supposed ‘models’ (hybrid/max fac etc) that even on their own terms cannot solve the problem of multiple incompatible promises. ‘Compromise proposals’ such as that from Boles which assume the existence of ‘third country’ planning are just more delusions. It doesn’t matter which version of delusion your gangs finally agree on if none of them has a basis in reality and so long as May/Hammond continue they will have no basis in reality.
You can dance around the fundamental issues all you want but in the end ‘reality cannot be fooled’.
The Government effectively has no credible policy and the whole world knows it. By not taking the basic steps any sane Government should have taken from 24 June 2016, including providing itself with world class legal advice, it’s ‘strategy’ has imploded. It now thinks its survival requires surrender, it thinks that admitting this risks its survival, it thinks that the MPs can be bullshitted by clever drafting from officials, and that once Leave MPs and donors — you guys — are ordering your champagne in the autumn for your parties on 30 March 2019 you will balk at bringing down the Government when you finally have to face that you’ve been conned. Eurosceptics are full of gak and threats they don’t deliver, they say in No10, and on this at least they have a point.
This set of problems cannot be solved by swapping ‘useless X’ for ‘competent Y’ or ‘better spin’.
This set of problems cannot be solved by listening to charlatans such as the overwhelming majority of economists and ‘trade experts’ who brand themselves pro-Brexit, live in parallel universes, and spin fantasies to you.
This set of problems derives partly from the fact that the wiring of power in Downing Street is systemically dysfunctional and, worse, those with real institutional power (Cabinet Office/HMT officials etc) have as their top priority the maintenance of this broken system and keeping Britain as closely tied to the EU as possible. There is effectively zero prospect of May’s team, totally underwater, solving these problems not least because they cannot see them — indeed, their only strategy is to ‘trust officials to be honest’, which is like trusting Bernie Madoff with your finances. Brexit cannot be done with the traditional Westminster/Whitehall system as Vote Leave warned repeatedly before 23 June 2016.
Further, lots of what Corbyn says is more popular than what Tory think tanks say and you believe (e.g nationalising the trains and water companies that have been run by corporate looters who Hammond says ‘we must defend’). You are only at 40% in the polls because a set of UKIP voters has decided to back you until they see how Brexit turns out. You only survived the most useless campaign in modern history because Vote Leave killed UKIP. You’re now acting like you want someone to create a serious version of it.
Ask yourselves: what happens when the country sees you’ve simultaneously a) ‘handed over tens of billions for feth all’ as they’ll say in focus groups (which the UK had no liability to pay), b) failed to do anything about unskilled immigration, c) persecuted the high skilled immigrants, such as scientists, who the public wants you to be MORE welcoming to, and d) failed to deliver on the nation’s Number One priority — funding for the NHS which is about to have a very high profile anniversary? And what happens if May staggers to 30 March 2019 and, as Barwell is floating with some of you, they then dig in to fight the 2022 campaign?
If you think that babble about ‘the complexity of the Irish border / the Union / peace’ will get you all off the hook, you must be listening to the same people who ran the 2017 campaign. It won’t. The public, when they tune back in at some point, will consider any argument based on Ireland as such obvious bs you must be lying. Given they already think you lie about everything, it won’t be a stretch.
Yes there are things you can do to mitigate the train wreck. For example, it requires using the period summer 2019 to autumn 2021 to change the political landscape, which is incompatible with the continuation of the May/Hammond brand of stagnation punctuated by rubbish crisis management. If you go into the 2022 campaign after five years of this and the contest is Tory promises versus Corbyn promises, you will be maximising the odds of Corbyn as PM. Since 1945, only once has a party trying to win a third term increased its number of seats. Not Thatcher. Not Blair. 1959 — after swapping Eden for Macmillan and with over ~6% growth the year before the vote. You will be starting without a majority (unlike others fighting for a third term). You won’t have half that growth — you will need something else. Shuffling some people is necessary but extremely far from sufficient.
Of course it could have worked out differently but that is now an argument over branching histories for the history books. Yes it’s true that May, Hammond, Heywood and Robbins are Remain and have screwed it up but you’re deluded if you think you’ll be able to blame the debacle just on them. Whitehall is better at the blame game than you are, officials are completely dominant in this government, ministers have chosen to put Heywood/Robbins in charge, and YOU will get most of the blame from the public.
The sooner you internalise these facts and face reality, the better for the country and you.
Every day that you refuse to face reality increases the probability not only of a terrible deal but also of Seumas Milne shortly casting his curious and sceptical eyes over your assets and tax affairs.
It also increases the probability that others will conclude your party is incapable of coping with this situation and, unless it changes fast, drastic action will be needed including the creation of new forces to reflect public contempt for both the main parties and desire for a political force that reflects public priorities.
If revolution there is to be, better to undertake it than undergo it…
Best wishes
Former campaign director of Vote Leave
.. TL/dr : we are fethed.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
As always, credit to reds8n for digging this stuff up.
But I'll tell people one thing with my hand on heart: I feel vindicated by that statement from that vote leave guy.
I don't regret Brexit. I'd vote for it again tomorrow.
And for 2 years, I've probably bored people to death with my arguments that with some hard work and vision, Brexit could and should have been a success.
Instead, we have a parliament of minnows who have well and truly fethed things up.
The Brexit side have plotted and schemed for this for 40 years and they have fething nothing.
The Remain side have done nothing but try to sabotage the result for 2 fething years with legal challenges, court room battles, amendments, leaks, briefings, hard Brexit, soft Brexit, 20 more referendums etc etc
They have never accepted the result or tried to do the best for the country.
Their horsegak is as bad as the Brexit supporting horsegak.
How the feth can the country present a united front in crucial negotiations when half of parliament is rooting for the EU?
How the feth can a government negotiate when Remain MPs are trying to force it to accept any old horsegak from the EU by removing a no deal option?
So we have this perfect storm of sabotage and incompetence with the end result of Brexit going off the cliff.
Our MPS, ladies and gentlemen, are useless. Not fit for running a bath, never mind a country.
I get this horsegak that Brexit shouldn't have happened because of this incompetence.
Well, let's flip that, because even when we were in the EU, our MPs still fethed things up and didn't even know how the EU worked half the time.
I would finish by saying to fellow dakka members that Remain or Leave, our government is hopeless, has been for a very long time, and is unlikely to change unless the British Public gets off their rears and does something about it.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Does anyone genuinely believe there’s not going to be a second, better informed referendum?
I mean, seriously.
There’s dishonest campaigns, and there’s the EU exit campaigns.
But now, potential rammifications are beginning to crystallise. Now as a die hard Remainer, none of it is a surprise to me.
But not everyone that voted leave is a swivel eyed, mindless moron. Many are pragmatic. Leaving the EU is an ideal - but so is me successfully seducing Dani Divine, marrying her, and still enjoying a Certain Lifestyle Opposed To Monogamy.
We’re coming to crunch time. And frankly, given the closeness of the vote (remember, a third of the electorate didn’t vote at all) I think there’s a need for it.
Now get me wrong. I really, genuinely, deeply hope people come to their senses and see a rose tinted jingoistic pipe dream for what it is. But....but....if the result of said hypothetical second referendum is Leave? I’ll feel an awful lot better about the whole debacle. Because I cannot stand uninformed opinion - but I can respect an informed one, however much I may happen to disagree with it.
Seriously. Even if you voted Leave, don’t let a mere handful of the very worst the Tory Party run a close run thing roughshod. You stand up, and I’ll stand up. Let all of us demand an informed, non-binary vote.
If you win, you win. We’ll then all go down with the ship. But let’s not do it because Seaman Farage has sworn blind the iceberg up ahead is merely spectacularly dense fog, yeah?
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
AlmightyWalrus wrote: At what point does it become the fault of the people who insisted on it without having a clue what they were talking about?
Never...
“Good people are quick to help others in need, without hesitation or requiring proof the need is genuine. The wicked will believe they are fighting for good, but when others are in need they’ll be reluctant to help, withholding compassion until they see proof of that need. And yet Evil is quick to condemn, vilify and attack. For Evil, proof isn’t needed to bring harm, only hatred and a belief in the cause.”
Can I remind people of this fact: MPs voted by 6 to 1, 6 to FETHING 1 for a referendum.
Nobody pointed a gun at their heads, took their families hostage, brainwashed them, or paid them large sums of cash.
Free will. Free will. Free will ad nauseum.
So they asked the British people a question. And the British people said we want to leave the EU.
And the MPs cried and moaned and accused us of wrecking the country and tried to change the rules THEY wrote in the first place with horsegak about it being non-binding...
Honest to God, people, if they didn't like the answer, why did they ask the FETHING question in the first place?
And they could have stopped it. If they believed in the EU so much, if they believed Brexit was so bad for Britain, they could have shot down Article 50 by sticking to their principals and accepted defeat at the ballot box next election as a consequence. But they didn't because they are cowards. Cowards to a man and woman who choose money and comfort over their political beliefs.
You don't need or want people like that on your side. Remain supporters should bless the day we had a referendum because now you know the true colours of your allies. They are rats.
That's why Trump wins and the Tories have been in power in Britain for most of the last 100 years: the progressive, the liberals, they are fething useless. Feeble!
So they had two chances. The first by not having a referendum and the second by voting against A50. But they bottled it.
And this is what angers me and a lot of Brexit supporters: they had their chance to stop Brexit and they failed. And as a result, they should have got behind the nation and helped make Brexit work. They were duty bound to respect the decision. They're supposed to be democrats are they not?
I would have respected a Remain victory in 2016. I, the Brexiteer, would have respected and defended the Remain victory, even though it would have sickened me to do so.
And I don't give a damn about what Farage said if Leave only got 48%. The majority of the country, just like in Scotland 2014 would have respected the result and went home.
But what did we get? Stabbed in the back by cowards and saboteurs who used court room battles, press leaks, unelected peers, and sabotaging the government's negotiating position from day 1 because they didn't have the courage to stop Brexit themselves, so they got other people to do their dirty work for them, like the cowards they are.
If they bind the government to accepting a deal, any deal, then the EU can offer us any old gak and we'd have to accept it.
So again I repeat: we have useless Brexit MPs who have fethed this up and saboteur Remain MPs who hate the answer to a question they asked and the rules they wrote.
Angry? You're damn right I'm angry. The last 2 years have been a shambles.
If Brexit fails, I'm not carrying the can for it.
If you want to point the finger at somebody, point it at the House of Commons for a) not stopping it in the first place OR b) not having the ability to make it work.
Rant over!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/23 22:43:44
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
It's like going into a restaurant, and you look at the menu, and the menu says pizza and ice cream, so you ask for pizza and ice-cream
and then the manager accuses you of disruptive behaviour and says the chef can't make pizza and ice -cream, and it's your fault, even though the manager created the menu in the first place and knew the chef didn't have the skill to make pizza and ice-cream.
MPs moan about customs union and single market not being on the ballot paper, even though they wrote the question.
They moan about leaving the EU, even though they campaigned on manifestoes that said we'll leave the EU.
They moan about Brexit being too hard, even though they freely stood as MPs and were elected to make these decisions.
It's like a fireman moaning about having to put out fires or a doctor moaning about sick people turning up to a hospital.
They accuse Brexit supporters of being thick and stupid, even though MPs have controlled British education for 300 fething years...
But it's all DINLT's fault for voting. Maybe I should have ripped up the polling card? Attacked the postman for putting it through my letter box? Or blown up my local polling station?
They asked me for an opinion and then they moaned because they didn't like what I said...
That's what we're up against here.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
...never accepted the result or tried to do the best for the country.
We absolutely have been trying to do the best thing for the country. The best thing for this country is to stay in the fething EU. It is better for our economy and industry. It is better for our position on the world stage. It is better for our health and education systems. It is better for our environment and it is better for the freedoms and opportunities it presents to us and future generations. I am a proud Britain and a proud European and I will not let you destroy everything this country has become for a bunch of jingoistic, rose-tinted, rabble rousing nonsense.
And if you succeed and drag us out of the EU and return us to the 1970’s, when we were a marginalised, bankrupt and decaying nation, riddled with division and unrest, you will own it. You brought this about and we will hold you to account. You cannot stand on your soapbox, professing what a great thing this will be and then try and slink away, when we are shown to be right and you have crippled our nation.
Zed wrote: *All statements reflect my opinion at this moment. if some sort of pretty new model gets released (or if I change my mind at random) I reserve the right to jump on any bandwagon at will.
...never accepted the result or tried to do the best for the country.
We absolutely have been trying to do the best thing for the country. The best thing for this country is to stay in the fething EU. It is better for our economy and industry. It is better for our position on the world stage. It is better for our health and education systems. It is better for our environment and it is better for the freedoms and opportunities it presents to us and future generations. I am a proud Britain and a proud European and I will not let you destroy everything this country has become for a bunch of jingoistic, rose-tinted, rabble rousing nonsense.
And if you succeed and drag us out of the EU and return us to the 1970’s, when we were a marginalised, bankrupt and decaying nation, riddled with division and unrest, you will own it. You brought this about and we will hold you to account. You cannot stand on your soapbox, professing what a great thing this will be and then try and slink away, when we are shown to be right and you have crippled our nation.
You had your chance to stay in the EU in 2016. You lost. You had your chance to stay in the EU in 2017 by electing a party that would have reversed the referendum. You lost.
2 fething chances. Two
Is this best of 5 or something?
Remain supporters had 40 years to make the case for the EU. 40 years. If the EU is so great, why didn't Remain win?
Oh I forget, it was the Russians, the stupid people, the Klingons, and 1000 other reason why Remain lost.
And like the good democrats they are, did Remain say, oh, let's accept the result and put national unity first. Let's not confuse or muddy the waters. Let's unite and help get a good deal for Britain.
Did they do that? Did they hell.
They ran to the lawyers, they leaked to the press, they ran to the EU and vowed to support Brussels come what may. They blamed people like me for answering a question they asked and for following rules they wrote in the first place.
They complain about the 52%, even though they set the margin of victory at 50% + 1 vote.
They moan about people not knowing enough about the EU, but don't lift a finger to inform people.
They blamed the EU for decades for their own short comings, and then express surprise when people take them at face value.
They sent a leaflet to every British household saying they would respect the decision, and then they moan when people expect that decision to be honoured.
There's a name for that: Sabotage!
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/05/23 23:15:32
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
It's like going into a restaurant, and you look at the menu, and the menu says pizza and ice cream, so you ask for pizza and ice-cream
and then the manager accuses you of disruptive behaviour and says the chef can't make pizza and ice -cream, and it's your fault, even though the manager created the menu in the first place and knew the chef didn't have the skill to make pizza and ice-cream.
It's like going into a restaurant, and instead of looking at the menu (because it's got only a few unapalatable options) a weird donkey-jacketed salesman, unattached to the restaurant, has advised you about all the awesome things you could get in the restaurant. Caviar pizza, champagne smoothies and as much fish as you can handle.Then you ask for caviar pizza, champagne smoothies and all you can eat fish, and the actual restaurant owner says no, you've got a choice of just these things that aren't as good as you're used to. "But the caviar pizza!" you shout as you see the donkey-jacket and his mates leg it up the road. "No such thing" the owner says. "But maybe we can arrange a Norwegian platter?"
Man, jack-a-nory time is fun, isn't it?
“Good people are quick to help others in need, without hesitation or requiring proof the need is genuine. The wicked will believe they are fighting for good, but when others are in need they’ll be reluctant to help, withholding compassion until they see proof of that need. And yet Evil is quick to condemn, vilify and attack. For Evil, proof isn’t needed to bring harm, only hatred and a belief in the cause.”
As to the Norwegian option with a border in the Irish Sea, it's certainly a start, and probably a little more realistic than some of the other guff that's been proposed.
It'll go down like a pint of cold puke with the DUP and the ERG though. So not a totally bad thing then really.
"All their ferocity was turned outwards, against enemies of the State, foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals" - Orwell, 1984
...never accepted the result or tried to do the best for the country.
We absolutely have been trying to do the best thing for the country. The best thing for this country is to stay in the fething EU. It is better for our economy and industry. It is better for our position on the world stage. It is better for our health and education systems. It is better for our environment and it is better for the freedoms and opportunities it presents to us and future generations. I am a proud Britain and a proud European and I will not let you destroy everything this country has become for a bunch of jingoistic, rose-tinted, rabble rousing nonsense.
And if you succeed and drag us out of the EU and return us to the 1970’s, when we were a marginalised, bankrupt and decaying nation, riddled with division and unrest, you will own it. You brought this about and we will hold you to account. You cannot stand on your soapbox, professing what a great thing this will be and then try and slink away, when we are shown to be right and you have crippled our nation.
You had your chance to stay in the EU in 2016. You lost. You had your chance to stay in the EU in 2017 by electing a party that would have reversed the referendum. You lost.
2 fething chances. Two
Is this best of 5 or something?
Remain supporters had 40 years to make the case for the EU. 40 years. If the EU is so great, why didn't Remain win?
Oh I forget, it was the Russians, the stupid people, the Klingons, and 1000 other reason why Remain lost.
And like the good democrats they are, did Remain say, oh, let's accept the result and put national unity first. Let's not confuse or muddy the waters. Let's unite and help get a good deal for Britain.
Did they do that? Did they hell.
They ran to the lawyers, they leaked to the press, they ran to the EU and vowed to support Brussels come what may. They blamed people like me for answering a question they asked and for following rules they wrote in the first place.
They complain about the 52%, even though they set the margin of victory at 50% + 1 vote.
They moan about people not knowing enough about the EU, but don't lift a finger to inform people.
They blamed the EU for decades for their own short comings, and then express surprise when people take them at face value.
They sent a leaflet to every British household saying they would respect the decision, and then they moan when people expect that decision to be honoured.
There's a name for that: Sabotage!
Please explain why I would vote for the party that sold me up a river in 2010 as a student going to university?
And you're doing that thing again where making sure things go through the British democratic motions, is somehow undemocratic and sabotage?
Also something about Farage talking about rerunning it if remain won by a couple of percent, but it's sabotage when remainers suggest it.
.. which is really quite something.
