(again)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-resigns-as-ukip-leader-a7118626.html

On 04/07/2016 10:42, Andy Burns wrote:
(again)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-resigns-as-ukip-leader-a7118626.html


Odd how, having created a disaster for the UK, the main protagonists
have decided to run for cover. Who can possibly explain that?

On 04/07/16 10:44, GB wrote:
On 04/07/2016 10:42, Andy Burns wrote:
(again)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-resigns-as-ukip-leader-a7118626.html



Odd how, having created a disaster for the UK, the main protagonists
have decided to run for cover. Who can possibly explain that?


What a marvellously bigoted piece of spin, to be sure!


--
Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows investigation will lead
to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques.

GB wrote
Andy Burns wrote
(again)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-resigns-as-ukip-leader-a7118626.html

Odd how, having created a disaster for the UK,

There is no disaster for Britain.

the main protagonists have decided to run for cover.

Farage has done nothing of the sort.

Who can possibly explain that?

Anyone with even half a clue.

Farage has got what he wanted and realises that he is now completely
politically irrelevant and that his income will stop any day now.

On Monday, July 4, 2016 at 10:42:20 AM UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
(again)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-resigns-as-ukip-leader-a7118626.html

Still my MEP

Still claiming a nice salary.

Still rolling in expenses claims.

Philip

On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 10:44:43 +0100, GB wrote:

On 04/07/2016 10:42, Andy Burns wrote:
(again)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...ge-resigns-as-
ukip-leader-a7118626.html


Odd how, having created a disaster for the UK, the main protagonists
have decided to run for cover. Who can possibly explain that?

+1

One has to feel sorry for Farage's 'family and friends', though.



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

In article ,
GB wrote:
On 04/07/2016 10:42, Andy Burns wrote:
(again)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-resigns-as-ukip-leader-a7118626.html


Odd how, having created a disaster for the UK, the main protagonists
have decided to run for cover. Who can possibly explain that?

Probably a hissy fit since all the publicity at the moment is about Tory
and Labour. So he'll be hoping his party will refuse to accept his
resignation once more and get him back in the headlines.

Interesting comparison with Labour. Both their parliamentary sides seem to
hate their leader. Except it's unanimous with UKIP.

--
*When chemists die, they barium.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
GB wrote
Andy Burns wrote
(again)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-resigns-as-ukip-leader-a7118626.html

Odd how, having created a disaster for the UK,

There is no disaster for Britain.

the main protagonists have decided to run for cover.

Farage has done nothing of the sort.

Who can possibly explain that?

Anyone with even half a clue.

Farage has got what he wanted and realises that he is now completely
politically irrelevant and that his income will stop any day now.

Isn't it odd that despite your thousands of posts on the EU etc that you
have absolutely no clue how it works?

--
*IF ONE SYNCHRONIZED SWIMMER DROWNS, DO THE REST DROWN TOO?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 04/07/2016 12:38, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , GB
wrote:

On 04/07/2016 10:42, Andy Burns wrote:
(again)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...igns-as-ukip-l

eader-a7118626.html

Odd how, having created a disaster for the UK, the main protagonists
have decided to run for cover. Who can possibly explain that?

No, the situation we are now in was created by the voters. Remember
them, all these deluded people who put an X in the wrong box?


They certainly were being lied to. £350m per week?

On 04/07/16 13:42, GB wrote:
On 04/07/2016 12:38, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , GB
wrote:

On 04/07/2016 10:42, Andy Burns wrote:
(again)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...igns-as-ukip-l


eader-a7118626.html

Odd how, having created a disaster for the UK, the main protagonists
have decided to run for cover. Who can possibly explain that?

No, the situation we are now in was created by the voters. Remember
them, all these deluded people who put an X in the wrong box?


They certainly were being lied to. £350m per week?


Or alternatively,. the emergency high tax budget and 'wont be able to
trade with the EU' lies?

DO you realise how whiny and pathetic you sound?


--
No Apple devices were knowingly used in the preparation of this post.

On 04/07/2016 14:09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 04/07/16 13:42, GB wrote:
On 04/07/2016 12:38, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , GB
wrote:

On 04/07/2016 10:42, Andy Burns wrote:
(again)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...igns-as-ukip-l



eader-a7118626.html

Odd how, having created a disaster for the UK, the main protagonists
have decided to run for cover. Who can possibly explain that?

No, the situation we are now in was created by the voters. Remember
them, all these deluded people who put an X in the wrong box?


They certainly were being lied to. £350m per week?


Or alternatively,. the emergency high tax budget and 'wont be able to
trade with the EU' lies?

So, you agree there were lots of lies, and the referendum result is thus
invalid.

On 04/07/16 14:30, GB wrote:
On 04/07/2016 14:09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 04/07/16 13:42, GB wrote:
On 04/07/2016 12:38, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , GB
wrote:

On 04/07/2016 10:42, Andy Burns wrote:
(again)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...igns-as-ukip-l




eader-a7118626.html

Odd how, having created a disaster for the UK, the main protagonists
have decided to run for cover. Who can possibly explain that?

No, the situation we are now in was created by the voters. Remember
them, all these deluded people who put an X in the wrong box?


They certainly were being lied to. £350m per week?


Or alternatively,. the emergency high tax budget and 'wont be able to
trade with the EU' lies?

So, you agree there were lots of lies, and the referendum result is thus
invalid.




No, anyone who compared what both sides were saying that had more than
half a brain cell would conclude that at least some people were lying.

Lying is allowed in political campaigns, and it's even expected.

It doesn't invalidate the result at all.

Because if you had that as a criteria we would still be running the 1945
elections.


--
Karl Marx said religion is the opium of the people.
But Marxism is the crack cocaine.

On 04/07/16 15:23, Tim Streater wrote:
Because if you had that as a criteria we would still be running the
1945 elections.

Criterion. But otherwise +1

That's what happens when you start off writng it one way, change it and
don't go back an proofread ;-)


--
Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows investigation will lead
to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques.

On Monday, 4 July 2016 11:49:22 UTC+1, Bob Eager wrote:
On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 10:44:43 +0100, GB wrote:

On 04/07/2016 10:42, Andy Burns wrote:
(again)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...ge-resigns-as-
ukip-leader-a7118626.html


Odd how, having created a disaster for the UK, the main protagonists
have decided to run for cover. Who can possibly explain that?

+1

One has to feel sorry for Farage's 'family and friends', though.

you mean because they get more time to aspend with him now he's unemployed ?

On Monday, 4 July 2016 14:30:57 UTC+1, GB wrote:
On 04/07/2016 14:09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 04/07/16 13:42, GB wrote:
On 04/07/2016 12:38, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , GB
wrote:

On 04/07/2016 10:42, Andy Burns wrote:
(again)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...igns-as-ukip-l



eader-a7118626.html

Odd how, having created a disaster for the UK, the main protagonists
have decided to run for cover. Who can possibly explain that?

No, the situation we are now in was created by the voters. Remember
them, all these deluded people who put an X in the wrong box?


They certainly were being lied to. £350m per week?


Or alternatively,. the emergency high tax budget and 'wont be able to
trade with the EU' lies?

So, you agree there were lots of lies, and the referendum result is thus
invalid.

I thought we all knew that the majority of what was said was lies
by the other side, but that doesn;t mean that 17 million didn't vote to leave,
whether or not that is a majority is another question.

On 04/07/16 10:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
[...]

What a marvellously bigoted piece of spin, to be sure!


Name-calling everyone you don't agree with is very poor debating
technique, it's inflammatory and it's rude.

You might not agree that Farage has created a disaster or that he is now
'running away' from it, but it isn't bigotry to say so by any stretch of
the imagination.

TW

On 04/07/16 15:01, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
[...]


Lying is allowed in political campaigns, and it's even expected.


You are way, way off the mark here. I am not a lawyer but it has never
in my lifetime been acceptable or expected for politicians to cynically
and deliberately lie to voters. The referendum campaign plumbed new
depths of dishonesty and deceit. Quite wrong of you to say it is normal.

Tim W

On 04/07/2016 10:42, Andy Burns wrote:
(again)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-resigns-as-ukip-leader-a7118626.html


But for how long?

On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 15:51:18 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

But for how long?

I thought today was meant to be Carswell being kicked out of UKIP?

Maybe that won't happen after all. Maybe the party's had enough of Nige's
ego being the defining factor...?

On 04/07/2016 15:43, TimW wrote:
On 04/07/16 15:01, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
[...]


Lying is allowed in political campaigns, and it's even expected.


You are way, way off the mark here. I am not a lawyer but it has never
in my lifetime been acceptable or expected for politicians to cynically
and deliberately lie to voters. The referendum campaign plumbed new
depths of dishonesty and deceit. Quite wrong of you to say it is normal.

Tim W

You have to remember UKIP supporters think lies are normal because some
of their supporters do it all the time.

TNP has lied throughout this campaign and then calls everyone else with
a different opinion a liar.

I wouldn't trust anything he says any more.

On 04/07/2016 15:18, Tim Streater wrote:

They certainly were being lied to. £350m per week?

Is the amount we are assessed each week by the EU. The cheque that is
sent to Juncker each week is that less our rebate, whatever that is.


So not £350M a week then.

And when challenged about it UKIP supporters call you a liar.

dennis@home wrote:
On 04/07/2016 15:18, Tim Streater wrote:

They certainly were being lied to. £350m per week?

Is the amount we are assessed each week by the EU. The cheque that is
sent to Juncker each week is that less our rebate, whatever that is.


So not £350M a week then.

And when challenged about it UKIP supporters call you a liar.

Still whinging, loser!

On 04/07/16 15:36, TimW wrote:
On 04/07/16 10:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
[...]

What a marvellously bigoted piece of spin, to be sure!


Name-calling everyone you don't agree with is very poor debating
technique, it's inflammatory and it's rude.

You might not agree that Farage has created a disaster or that he is now
'running away' from it, but it isn't bigotry to say so by any stretch of
the imagination.

TW

It is.

But of course the real mark of a bigot, is they can never see it.

IT was always a catch 22. Nigel stays on and vies for office "He is just
a career politician after all, and lied about resigning when Brexit was
achieved"

Nigel leaves to have a life after achieving his specific goal and keeps
true to his word "Nigel is running away"

It doesn't matter what he does, you will look for a negative spin. That
is bigotry.




--
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

On 04/07/16 15:43, TimW wrote:
On 04/07/16 15:01, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
[...]


Lying is allowed in political campaigns, and it's even expected.


You are way, way off the mark here. I am not a lawyer but it has never
in my lifetime been acceptable or expected for politicians to cynically
and deliberately lie to voters. The referendum campaign plumbed new
depths of dishonesty and deceit. Quite wrong of you to say it is normal.


I am sorry but you are correct, you are not a lawyer.

In business there are laws against misrepresenting, it is at some levels
a tort.

There is no such law in politics when campaigning.





Tim W


--
All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that
all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is
fully understood.

On 04/07/16 15:56, Adrian wrote:
On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 15:51:18 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

But for how long?

I thought today was meant to be Carswell being kicked out of UKIP?

Maybe that won't happen after all. Maybe the party's had enough of Nige's
ego being the defining factor...?

Nige's ego was never the defining factor Adrian.

Only yours.


--
€œIt is hard to imagine a more stupid decision or more dangerous way of
making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people
who pay no price for being wrong.€�

Thomas Sowell

On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 16:19:25 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 04/07/16 15:36, TimW wrote:
On 04/07/16 10:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
[...]

What a marvellously bigoted piece of spin, to be sure!


Name-calling everyone you don't agree with is very poor debating
technique, it's inflammatory and it's rude.

You might not agree that Farage has created a disaster or that he is now
'running away' from it, but it isn't bigotry to say so by any stretch of
the imagination.

TW

It is.

But of course the real mark of a bigot, is they can never see it.

IT was always a catch 22. Nigel stays on and vies for office "He is just
a career politician after all, and lied about resigning when Brexit was
achieved"

Nigel leaves to have a life after achieving his specific goal and keeps
true to his word "Nigel is running away"

It doesn't matter what he does, you will look for a negative spin. That
is bigotry.

That's because TimW is a politician, whether he admits it or not.

And T i m isn't and I agree with TimW.

I guess none of this is something any 'cold and prickly' simply can't
see as just as been described, the 'rat leaving the sinking ship',
especially disgusting considering that particular rat has tried to
(potentially) scuttle what was the '4th ship of the line' in the
first place?

Now, there may be a very valid (positive) reason he has done this and
why it is the best thing for the country (apart from by him just going
I mean).

I mean, by him mutineering at least clears the decks for the remaining
crew to try to steer the ship away from the rocks.

Anyone care to explain please?

Cheers, T i m

In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:
On 04/07/2016 15:18, Tim Streater wrote:

They certainly were being lied to. £350m per week?

Is the amount we are assessed each week by the EU. The cheque that is
sent to Juncker each week is that less our rebate, whatever that is.


So not £350M a week then.

And when challenged about it UKIP supporters call you a liar.

I feel very sorry for these poor sods who believe the £350m figure. They
must look at their pay slip and think they've actually got the gross
amount to spend.

Although given the average UKIP supporter, that would be their dole cheque.

--
*We never really grow*up, we only learn how to act in public.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote
Rod Speed wrote
GB wrote
Andy Burns wrote

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-resigns-as-ukip-leader-a7118626.html

Odd how, having created a disaster for the UK,

There is no disaster for Britain.

the main protagonists have decided to run for cover.

Farage has done nothing of the sort.

Who can possibly explain that?

Anyone with even half a clue.

Farage has got what he wanted and realises that he is now completely
politically irrelevant and that his income will stop any day now.

Isn't it odd that despite your thousands of posts on the
EU etc that you have absolutely no clue how it works?

Nothing odd about you being too stupid to have even noticed that
given that Britain ended up with one of the lowest unemployment
rates of the majors in europe and the 4th best economy in the entire
****ing world after much of the world financial system imploded
spectacularly after 2008, that it isnt going to be destroyed by leaving
the EU and will be able to trade with the EU fine under the WTO rules
just like all of the USA, Japan, China, India, Canada, Australia etc do
right now, in the worst possible outcome where the EU is actually
stupid enough to cut its nose off to spite its face and refuses to
have any agreement with Britain and Britain isnt actually stupid
enough to agree to the EU's demand that its 4 freedoms must
be part of any agreement.

TimW wrote
The Natural Philosopher wrote

What a marvellously bigoted piece of spin, to be sure!

Name-calling everyone you don't agree with is very poor
debating technique, it's inflammatory and it's rude.

Corse you are always immaculately polite every time you post, eh ?

You might not agree that Farage has created a disaster
or that he is now 'running away' from it, but it isn't
bigotry to say so by any stretch of the imagination.

It is actually.

TimW wrote
The Natural Philosopher wrote

Lying is allowed in political campaigns, and it's even expected.

You are way, way off the mark here.

Like hell he is.

I am not a lawyer but it has never in my lifetime been acceptable
or expected for politicians to cynically and deliberately lie to voters.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

The referendum campaign plumbed new depths of dishonesty and deceit.

Because it was much more binary than any general election can ever be.

Quite wrong of you to say it is normal.

He said the lying is in political campaigns. He's right.

pamela wrote
The Natural Philosopher wrote

No, anyone who compared what both sides were
saying that had more than half a brain cell would
conclude that at least some people were lying.

Lying is allowed in political campaigns, and it's even expected.

It doesn't invalidate the result at all.

Because if you had that as a criteria we
would still be running the 1945 elections.

If "lying is allowed in political campaigns"
then how about the following lie.

It isnt a lie.

David Cameron promised a referendum and he also promised
to implement it but instead of doing that he resigned.

He never said he would personally implement it and had in
fact said that he wouldn’t be seeking a third term well before
the referendum, so anyone with a clue would have noticed
that he wouldn’t be personally implementing the brexit if
that is what the referendum decided would happen.

I don't remember the Commons or the Cabinet
promising to implement the outcome of referendum.

They didn’t need to, it was obvious that they
weren't actually stupid enough to ignore it.

The man who lied about his promises has gone.

No he has not.

Sorry about that!

Dave Plowman (News) wrote

They must look at their pay slip and think
they've actually got the gross amount to spend.

Although given the average UKIP supporter, that would be their dole
cheque.

Even sillier than you usually manage. Given that the unemployment rate
at the 2015 general election was 5.x% and the percentage of voters who
voted UKIP was around 13%, and plenty didn't bother to vote at all, even you
should be able to work out that most UKIP voters couldn't be getting the
dole.

In article , GB
writes
On 04/07/2016 12:38, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , GB
wrote:

On 04/07/2016 10:42, Andy Burns wrote:
(again)


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...rage-resigns-a
s-ukip-l

eader-a7118626.html

Odd how, having created a disaster for the UK, the main protagonists
have decided to run for cover. Who can possibly explain that?

No, the situation we are now in was created by the voters. Remember
them, all these deluded people who put an X in the wrong box?


They certainly were being lied to. £350m per week?


So where's the lie?
--
bert

In article , Tim Streater
writes
In article , GB
wrote:

On 04/07/2016 12:38, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , GB
wrote:

On 04/07/2016 10:42, Andy Burns wrote:
(again)


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...arage-resigns-
as-ukip-leader-a7118626.html

Odd how, having created a disaster for the UK, the main protagonists
have decided to run for cover. Who can possibly explain that?

No, the situation we are now in was created by the voters. Remember
them, all these deluded people who put an X in the wrong box?

They certainly were being lied to. £350m per week?

Is the amount we are assessed each week by the EU. The cheque that is
sent to Juncker each week is that less our rebate, whatever that is.

And that was made perfectly clear during the campaign not least by the
remain side.
--
bert

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:
On 04/07/2016 15:18, Tim Streater wrote:

They certainly were being lied to. £350m per week?

Is the amount we are assessed each week by the EU. The cheque that is
sent to Juncker each week is that less our rebate, whatever that is.


So not £350M a week then.

And when challenged about it UKIP supporters call you a liar.

I feel very sorry for these poor sods who believe the £350m figure.
No one was misled by it
They
must look at their pay slip and think they've actually got the gross
amount to spend.

So if someone asks you what your salary is you quote the net figure?
Although given the average UKIP supporter, that would be their dole cheque.

Insults,insults.
--
bert

In article ,
pamela wrote:
On 20:59 4 Jul 2016, Rod Speed wrote:

pamela wrote
The Natural Philosopher wrote

No, anyone who compared what both sides were saying that had
more than half a brain cell would conclude that at least some
people were lying.

Lying is allowed in political campaigns, and it's even
expected.

It doesn't invalidate the result at all.

Because if you had that as a criteria we would still be
running the 1945 elections.

If "lying is allowed in political campaigns" then how about the
following lie.

It isnt a lie.

David Cameron promised a referendum and he also promised to
implement it but instead of doing that he resigned.

He never said he would personally implement it

Cameron said very clearly several times that he would implement
the result of the referendum whatever it was.

If you want to give the impression, as I think you do, of
following the UK referendum then Google is a quick way to check if
you have got your facts right about something you believe is
wrong.

and had in fact said that he wouldn’t be seeking a third term
well before the referendum, so anyone with a clue would have
noticed that he wouldn’t be personally implementing the brexit
if that is what the referendum decided would happen.

I don't remember the Commons or the Cabinet promising to
implement the outcome of referendum.

They didn’t need to, it was obvious that they weren't actually
stupid enough to ignore it.

The Commons and Cabinet have not promised to implement the
referendum result. Several influential dissenting voices have
recently suggested that they don't - especially the House of
Commons. There are links posted in this group which tell you this.

The man who lied about his promises has gone.

No he has not.

Cameron is a lame duck and said he will not initiate Article 50.
For all intents and purposes he's not going to be around to answer
for breaking his promises.

and nor are the others either. Very strange

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

pamela wrote
Rod Speed wrote
pamela wrote
The Natural Philosopher wrote

No, anyone who compared what both sides were
saying that had more than half a brain cell would
conclude that at least some people were lying.

Lying is allowed in political campaigns, and it's even expected.

It doesn't invalidate the result at all.

Because if you had that as a criteria we
would still be running the 1945 elections.

If "lying is allowed in political campaigns"
then how about the following lie.

It isnt a lie.

David Cameron promised a referendum and he also promised
to implement it but instead of doing that he resigned.

He never said he would personally implement it

Cameron said very clearly several times that he would
implement the result of the referendum whatever it was.

And given that he had said well before the referendum
happened that he wouldn’t be the PM for the third term,
and that there would be at least 2 years from when the
referendum result was known, even if Article 50 was
done immediately after the referendum result was
known, it should have been obvious that he wasn’t
taking about him personally doing it.

If you want to give the impression, as I think you do, of following
the UK referendum then Google is a quick way to check if you
have got your facts right about something you believe is wrong.

Don’t need to do anything like that on what Cameron said about what
would happen if the referendum decided that Britain would leave.

and had in fact said that he wouldn’t be seeking a third term
well before the referendum, so anyone with a clue would have
noticed that he wouldn’t be personally implementing the brexit
if that is what the referendum decided would happen.

I don't remember the Commons or the Cabinet
promising to implement the outcome of referendum.

They didn’t need to, it was obvious that they
weren't actually stupid enough to ignore it.

The Commons and Cabinet have not promised
to implement the referendum result.

Irrelevant to what Cameron said.

Several influential dissenting voices have recently suggested
that they don't - especially the House of Commons.

And it remains to be seen if any of them are actually
influential at all on that particular question. Or that
the HoC is actually that stupid.

There are links posted in this group which tell you this.

Don’t need any links on that.

The man who lied about his promises has gone.

No he has not.

Cameron is a lame duck

But isnt gone yet.

and said he will not initiate Article 50.

Because he will be replaced in a few weeks and he
believes it makes more sense for his replacement
to decide on that question instead of him.

For all intents and purposes he's not going to
be around to answer for breaking his promises.

He hasn’t broken any promises. He never promised
to personally be involved in Britain leaving the EU
if the referendum decided Britain should leave. In
fact he had previously announced that he would
not be the PM at the next general election well
before the referendum happened.

On Monday, 4 July 2016 15:43:03 UTC+1, TimW wrote:
On 04/07/16 15:01, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
[...]


Lying is allowed in political campaigns, and it's even expected.


You are way, way off the mark here. I am not a lawyer but it has never
in my lifetime been acceptable or expected for politicians to cynically
and deliberately lie to voters. The referendum campaign plumbed new
depths of dishonesty and deceit. Quite wrong of you to say it is normal.

Tim W

Now I've really heard it all! What planet are you from?


NT

On Monday, 4 July 2016 16:00:32 UTC+1, dennis@home wrote:
On 04/07/2016 15:43, TimW wrote:
On 04/07/16 15:01, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Lying is allowed in political campaigns, and it's even expected.

You are way, way off the mark here. I am not a lawyer but it has never
in my lifetime been acceptable or expected for politicians to cynically
and deliberately lie to voters. The referendum campaign plumbed new
depths of dishonesty and deceit. Quite wrong of you to say it is normal.

Tim W

You have to remember UKIP supporters think lies are normal because some
of their supporters do it all the time.

TNP has lied throughout this campaign and then calls everyone else with
a different opinion a liar.

I wouldn't trust anything he says any more.

How naive does one have to be to trust what a politician says?


NT

On Monday, 4 July 2016 20:22:31 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
TimW wrote

I am not a lawyer but it has never in my lifetime been acceptable
or expected for politicians to cynically and deliberately lie to voters.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

It's that once a month where Rod actually gets something right.


NT