http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politic...he-eu-36745584

And how many of the are needed to change a lightbulb?
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
Remember, if you don't like where I post
or what I say, you don't have to
read my posts! :-)
"harry" wrote in message
...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politic...he-eu-36745584

harry wrote

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politic...he-eu-36745584

****ing hell. You can certainly see why some of you lot howl about Poles and
Romanians.

It would be interesting to see the same chart with non EUians.

The working EUians compared with working non
EUians is interesting too and calls Plowthing's lie.

About 60 million until UK nationals cease to be EU nationals.

On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:38:43 -0700, jgh wrote:

About 60 million until UK nationals cease to be EU nationals.

The simple fact that such an obvious answer needed to be given
demonstrates the entire cause of our ****ed-up relationship with the EU.

Far too many people cannot get their heads around the fact that the UK is
part of the European continent. We _are_ Europeans. Europe is not "them",
it is "us".

In article ,
Adrian wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:38:43 -0700, jgh wrote:

About 60 million until UK nationals cease to be EU nationals.

The simple fact that such an obvious answer needed to be given
demonstrates the entire cause of our ****ed-up relationship with the EU.

Far too many people cannot get their heads around the fact that the UK is
part of the European continent. We _are_ Europeans. Europe is not "them",
it is "us".

Fog in Channel - Continent isolated.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 08:57:51 +0100, charles wrote:

About 60 million until UK nationals cease to be EU nationals.

The simple fact that such an obvious answer needed to be given
demonstrates the entire cause of our ****ed-up relationship with the
EU.

Far too many people cannot get their heads around the fact that the UK
is part of the European continent. We _are_ Europeans. Europe is not
"them", it is "us".

Fog in Channel - Continent isolated.

*ding*

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 08:57:51 +0100, charles wrote:

In article ,
Adrian wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:38:43 -0700, jgh wrote:

About 60 million until UK nationals cease to be EU nationals.

The simple fact that such an obvious answer needed to be given
demonstrates the entire cause of our ****ed-up relationship with the
EU.

Far too many people cannot get their heads around the fact that the UK
is part of the European continent. We _are_ Europeans. Europe is not
"them",
it is "us".

Fog in Channel - Continent isolated.

I see that Lush are shutting down manufacturing for the EU, currently
based in Poole. They are moving it to the 'mainland'. They'll keep
manufacturing there for the UK only.

That undoubtedly makes good business sense, as they don't know what will
happen with the 'single market'. Might be all right, might not. But a
third of their workers are not UK nationals, and they could have
problems. Poole votes 58% to leave, so I don't suppose they feel very
welcome; they'll go with the jobs.

Loss of £4.5M to the Poole economy, too.



--
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

"Adrian" wrote in message ...
On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:38:43 -0700, jgh wrote:

About 60 million until UK nationals cease to be EU nationals.

The simple fact that such an obvious answer needed to be given
demonstrates the entire cause of our ****ed-up relationship with the EU.

Far too many people cannot get their heads around the fact that the UK is
part of the European continent. We _are_ Europeans. Europe is not "them",
it is "us".

The problem is European countries hardly ever feature on popular BBC
News programmes or in newspapers at all. As far as the average person
living in the UK is concerned, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, The
Netherlands, Luxembourg might not even exist at all. The only
time they ever feature is if one of their politicians makes
a gaffe which reflects badly on their own country or on the UK's
relationship with the EU. Or there's some natural disaster. Other
than that nothing. These countries might not even need exist except
as providing background scenery for the TdF and various detective
series. Oh there was the Belgium thing a while back. No government
Belgium was going to implode. No more since.

Contrast that with the US. There are lots of guns in the US
underlying racial tension and loads of nutcases. So what else
is new ? Week in week out lead stories are about the US
blah blah blah. If it isn't typhoons is people going mad
with guns.

Ah but is its the "special relationship". See if they care.
"The Sopranos" - not a typical US family but designed to
appeal to the sensibilities and tastes of your average US
viewer/subscriber. Now count how many time the UK is
ever mentioned by anyonme in the Sopranos. Zero. Zilch. When
Tony Soprano watches the History Channel he watches Adolf
Hitler and doubtless the US part in his downfall. When his
wife and her friend got to Europe for some culture they
go to Paris with location shots on the quays. All the Italian
celebrate Columbus Day when CC discovered the West Indies
- never setting foot anywhere near Noo Joysey. That was
Brits.

And Bush ****ing all over his poodle Blair is nothing more
than might be expected

De Gaulle was right. He was right then and he's be right now
unfortunately. This is just one big elephant in the corner
that never gets a mention.

After all translators and polyglot journos cost money
and what TV channel or newspaper can afford those these days ?


michael adams

....

On 11/07/2016 08:57, charles wrote:
In article ,
Adrian wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:38:43 -0700, jgh wrote:

About 60 million until UK nationals cease to be EU nationals.

The simple fact that such an obvious answer needed to be given
demonstrates the entire cause of our ****ed-up relationship with the EU.

Far too many people cannot get their heads around the fact that the UK is
part of the European continent. We _are_ Europeans. Europe is not "them",
it is "us".

Fog in Channel - Continent isolated.

Nope. It was "us" until the land connection became the North Sea. Now
it is them and us. Has been for 10,000 years.

What part of "europe" did those 5 Gambian nationals, who were squashed
by lumps of concrete, come from ?. Since Gambia is an ex-British colony
and is entirely surrounded by Senegal, which was French, how did they
acquire 'Spanish' passports ? (which means whoosh, UK benefit system
here we come). I suspect they would never have been able to qualify for
a UK passport because they are unskilled and cannot claim 'asylum'.

The sooner we leave and slam the door on this abuse the better.
Excluding London, Cardiff, Bristol and Scotland the vote for leaving
was more like 60/40 with an 80% turnout, the latter typical for
Labours heartland, unheard of in a General election.

"Andrew" wrote in message
...

Nope. It was "us" until the land connection became the North Sea. Now
it is them and us. Has been for 10,000 years.

Hardly. Where do you think all the Celts, Picts, Angles, Saxons,
Iceni, Belgae came from Andrew ?

And so you know who build all those roads ?


michael adams

....

In article ,
Andrew wrote:
Fog in Channel - Continent isolated.

Nope. It was "us" until the land connection became the North Sea. Now
it is them and us. Has been for 10,000 years.

Could you define 'them and us', Andrew?

I take it you have traced your bloodline back that 10,000 years?

You could also define what you mean by 'us'. Speaking for others is always
a sign of trying to persuade yourself you are right when actually knowing
you're on very thin ground.

--
*This message has been ROT-13 encrypted twice for extra security *

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

On 11/07/2016 08:57, charles wrote:
In article ,
Adrian wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:38:43 -0700, jgh wrote:

About 60 million until UK nationals cease to be EU nationals.

The simple fact that such an obvious answer needed to be given
demonstrates the entire cause of our ****ed-up relationship with the EU.

Far too many people cannot get their heads around the fact that the UK is
part of the European continent. We _are_ Europeans. Europe is not "them",
it is "us".

Fog in Channel - Continent isolated.

That may once have been a valid headline. I am sure I remember reading
that at one point Liverpool shipping accounted for over 40% of WORLD trade.

In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
Fog in Channel - Continent isolated.

That may once have been a valid headline. I am sure I remember reading
that at one point Liverpool shipping accounted for over 40% of WORLD
trade.

Except it's not in the Channel? ;-)

--
Small asylum seeker wanted as mud flap, must be flexible and willing to travel

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

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 14:35:12 +0100, Steve Walker wrote:

Fog in Channel - Continent isolated.

That may once have been a valid headline. I am sure I remember reading
that at one point Liverpool shipping accounted for over 40% of WORLD
trade.

Yes, the early 19th century. Back when the industrial revolution hadn't
actually spread outside these shores in any meaningful way.

Then slavery was banned in banned in 1807, and Liverpool's dominance fell
rapidly. Three-quarters of all slaving ships and around 1.5m African
slaves heading to the new world passed through Liverpool.

"It would be wrong to attribute all of Liverpool's success to the slave
trade, but it was undoubtedly the backbone of the town's prosperity.
Historian, David Richardson suggests that slaving and related trades may
have occupied a third and possibly a half of Liverpool's shipping
activity in the period 1750 to 1807"
http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/i...liverpool.aspx

Of course, it would not be out of character for some here to suggest that
was a huge mistake and the start of the rot setting in...

Mind you, at the time

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 12:01:37 +0100, Andrew wrote:

What part of "europe" did those 5 Gambian nationals, who were squashed
by lumps of concrete, come from ?. Since Gambia is an ex-British colony
and is entirely surrounded by Senegal, which was French, how did they
acquire 'Spanish' passports ?

I'd love for you to explain how come a "Gambian national" has a Spanish
passport... No, really, I would.

Because all that tells me is that you don't have the first ****ing clue
about how nationality works in any way, shape or form.

Here's a clue for you. They were Spanish nationals. They may have once
been Gambian nationals, but they were Spanish nationals when they were
issued Spanish passports.

How did they get Spanish nationality? In the same way as anybody else
can, I would presume...
http://www.expatica.com/es/visas-and...o-get-Spanish-
citizenship_107634.html

On 11/07/16 16:04, Adrian wrote:
slaving and related trades may
have occupied a third and possibly a half of Liverpool's shipping
activity in the period 1750 to 1807"
http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/i...liverpool.aspx

Of course, it would not be out of character for some here...
....to suggest as you have just done...

...."a huge mistake and the start of the rot setting in..."

Your racism and bigotry is as huge as your denial of it.


--
"Women actually are capable of being far more than the feminists will
let them."

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 16:09:56 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

slaving and related trades may have occupied a third and possibly a
half of Liverpool's shipping activity in the period 1750 to 1807"
http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/i...liverpool.aspx

Of course, it would not be out of character for some here...
...to suggest as you have just done...

..."a huge mistake and the start of the rot setting in..."

Your racism and bigotry is as huge as your denial of it.

chuckle
You are so very funny, y'know.

"Adrian" wrote in message ...
On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 14:35:12 +0100, Steve Walker wrote:

Fog in Channel - Continent isolated.

That may once have been a valid headline. I am sure I remember reading
that at one point Liverpool shipping accounted for over 40% of WORLD
trade.

Yes, the early 19th century. Back when the industrial revolution hadn't
actually spread outside these shores in any meaningful way.

Then slavery was banned in banned in 1807, and Liverpool's dominance fell
rapidly. Three-quarters of all slaving ships and around 1.5m African
slaves heading to the new world passed through Liverpool.

"It would be wrong to attribute all of Liverpool's success to the slave
trade, but it was undoubtedly the backbone of the town's prosperity.
Historian, David Richardson suggests that slaving and related trades may
have occupied a third and possibly a half of Liverpool's shipping
activity in the period 1750 to 1807"
http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/i...liverpool.aspx

Of course, it would not be out of character for some here to suggest that
was a huge mistake and the start of the rot setting in...

Mind you, at the time

Well yes and no. Liverpool was one corner of the triangle. Small manufactures
textiles etc. were shipped to West Africa where they were exchanged with chieftains
and Arab traders for captive slaves. POW's etc., Who were then shipped
to the US where the ships were then loaded with cotton for the Lancashire cotton mills.
Its this that made Liverpool so important. Proximity to Lancashire, Yorkshire
and the Midlands manufacturers via canals,
The rings in Liverpool docks were however only ever used for tying
up ships, not slaves. Even allowing for the geographical implausibly, slavery in
the UK had been abolished as far back as 1706: Smith v. Browne & Cooper
and so if there had ever been any they could have been freed by any bleeding
hearts do-gooders.
Britain abolished slavery throughout the British Empire in 1833
30 years later following the American Civil War Abraham Lincoln freed slaves
in the US.


michael adams

....

in 1505980 20160711 120137 Andrew wrote:
On 11/07/2016 08:57, charles wrote:
In article ,
Adrian wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:38:43 -0700, jgh wrote:

About 60 million until UK nationals cease to be EU nationals.

The simple fact that such an obvious answer needed to be given
demonstrates the entire cause of our ****ed-up relationship with the EU.

Far too many people cannot get their heads around the fact that the UK is
part of the European continent. We _are_ Europeans. Europe is not "them",
it is "us".

Fog in Channel - Continent isolated.

Nope. It was "us" until the land connection became the North Sea. Now
it is them and us. Has been for 10,000 years.

What about Corsica, Sardinia, Malta, Cyprus, etc etc are they not
part of Europe?


What part of "europe" did those 5 Gambian nationals, who were squashed
by lumps of concrete, come from ?. Since Gambia is an ex-British colony
and is entirely surrounded by Senegal, which was French, how did they
acquire 'Spanish' passports ? (which means whoosh, UK benefit system
here we come). I suspect they would never have been able to qualify for
a UK passport because they are unskilled and cannot claim 'asylum'.

The sooner we leave and slam the door on this abuse the better.
Excluding London, Cardiff, Bristol and Scotland the vote for leaving
was more like 60/40 with an 80% turnout, the latter typical for
Labours heartland, unheard of in a General election.

On Tuesday, 12 July 2016 07:58:54 UTC+1, Bob Martin wrote:
in 1505980 20160711 120137 Andrew wrote:
On 11/07/2016 08:57, charles wrote:
In article ,
Adrian wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:38:43 -0700, jgh wrote:

About 60 million until UK nationals cease to be EU nationals.

The simple fact that such an obvious answer needed to be given
demonstrates the entire cause of our ****ed-up relationship with the EU.

Far too many people cannot get their heads around the fact that the UK is
part of the European continent. We _are_ Europeans. Europe is not "them",
it is "us".

Fog in Channel - Continent isolated.

Nope. It was "us" until the land connection became the North Sea. Now
it is them and us. Has been for 10,000 years.

What about Corsica, Sardinia, Malta, Cyprus, etc etc are they not
part of Europe?


What part of "europe" did those 5 Gambian nationals, who were squashed
by lumps of concrete, come from ?. Since Gambia is an ex-British colony
and is entirely surrounded by Senegal, which was French, how did they
acquire 'Spanish' passports ? (which means whoosh, UK benefit system
here we come). I suspect they would never have been able to qualify for
a UK passport because they are unskilled and cannot claim 'asylum'.

The sooner we leave and slam the door on this abuse the better.
Excluding London, Cardiff, Bristol and Scotland the vote for leaving
was more like 60/40 with an 80% turnout, the latter typical for
Labours heartland, unheard of in a General election.

Parts of North and South America are in the EUSSR.

On Monday, 11 July 2016 13:39:46 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Andrew wrote:
Fog in Channel - Continent isolated.

Nope. It was "us" until the land connection became the North Sea. Now
it is them and us. Has been for 10,000 years.

Could you define 'them and us', Andrew?

it is a difficult one isn't it for some anyway

The lower inteligent find it more difficult to spot any differnices.


I take it you have traced your bloodline back that 10,000 years?

why is it down to bloodline ?


You could also define what you mean by 'us'. Speaking for others is always
a sign of trying to persuade yourself you are right when actually knowing
you're on very thin ground.

Can you tell the differnce between yourself and a banana you share 50% of the DNA, and compare that to a chimp with which you share over 98% DNA but I assume you can tell the differnce.

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
You could also define what you mean by 'us'. Speaking for others is
always a sign of trying to persuade yourself you are right when
actually knowing you're on very thin ground.

Can you tell the differnce between yourself and a banana you share 50%
of the DNA, and compare that to a chimp with which you share over 98%
DNA but I assume you can tell the differnce.

I suppose that makes sense to you. Perhaps I'll ask Wodney to translate.

--
*PMS jokes aren't funny; period.*

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

On Tuesday, 12 July 2016 14:19:44 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
You could also define what you mean by 'us'. Speaking for others is
always a sign of trying to persuade yourself you are right when
actually knowing you're on very thin ground.

Can you tell the differnce between yourself and a banana you share 50%
of the DNA, and compare that to a chimp with which you share over 98%
DNA but I assume you can tell the differnce.

I suppose that makes sense to you.

It does because I have a brain and have used teh term us and them in many ways previously so I know how to use those terms.


Perhaps I'll ask Wodney to translate.

That might help you work out what the terms mean good like with the help you've requested.

In article , Bob Eager
writes
On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 08:57:51 +0100, charles wrote:

In article ,
Adrian wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:38:43 -0700, jgh wrote:

About 60 million until UK nationals cease to be EU nationals.

The simple fact that such an obvious answer needed to be given
demonstrates the entire cause of our ****ed-up relationship with the
EU.

Far too many people cannot get their heads around the fact that the UK
is part of the European continent. We _are_ Europeans. Europe is not
"them",
it is "us".

Fog in Channel - Continent isolated.

I see that Lush are shutting down manufacturing for the EU, currently
based in Poole. They are moving it to the 'mainland'. They'll keep
manufacturing there for the UK only.

That undoubtedly makes good business sense, as they don't know what will
happen with the 'single market'. Might be all right, might not. But a
third of their workers are not UK nationals, and they could have
problems. Poole votes 58% to leave, so I don't suppose they feel very
welcome; they'll go with the jobs.

Loss of £4.5M to the Poole economy, too.



Total volte-face from Siemens though
--
bert

In article , michael
adams writes

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 14:35:12 +0100, Steve Walker wrote:

Fog in Channel - Continent isolated.

That may once have been a valid headline. I am sure I remember reading
that at one point Liverpool shipping accounted for over 40% of WORLD
trade.

Yes, the early 19th century. Back when the industrial revolution hadn't
actually spread outside these shores in any meaningful way.

Then slavery was banned in banned in 1807, and Liverpool's dominance fell
rapidly. Three-quarters of all slaving ships and around 1.5m African
slaves heading to the new world passed through Liverpool.

"It would be wrong to attribute all of Liverpool's success to the slave
trade, but it was undoubtedly the backbone of the town's prosperity.
Historian, David Richardson suggests that slaving and related trades may
have occupied a third and possibly a half of Liverpool's shipping
activity in the period 1750 to 1807"
http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/i...liverpool.aspx

Of course, it would not be out of character for some here to suggest that
was a huge mistake and the start of the rot setting in...

Mind you, at the time

Well yes and no. Liverpool was one corner of the triangle. Small manufactures
textiles etc. were shipped to West Africa where they were exchanged
with chieftains
and Arab traders for captive slaves. POW's etc., Who were then shipped
to the US where the ships were then loaded with cotton for the
Lancashire cotton mills.
Its this that made Liverpool so important. Proximity to Lancashire, Yorkshire
and the Midlands manufacturers via canals,
The rings in Liverpool docks were however only ever used for tying
up ships, not slaves. Even allowing for the geographical implausibly,
slavery in
the UK had been abolished as far back as 1706: Smith v. Browne & Cooper
and so if there had ever been any they could have been freed by any bleeding
hearts do-gooders.
Britain abolished slavery throughout the British Empire in 1833
30 years later following the American Civil War Abraham Lincoln freed slaves
in the US.


michael adams

...




Wasn't Bristol the major slave trade port?
--
bert

"bert" wrote in message ...

Wasn't Bristol the major slave trade port?

For around 15 years ending around 1740. Try looking
it up.

As I said Liverpool's importance derived from its proximity
to manufacturing centres, and wasn't due soley to the
slave trade. Josiah Wedgewood was both a prominent
abolitionist and a promoter of the Trent Mersey
canal. Which enabled the likes of himself and Matthew
Boulton, Watts partner to export direct to America
on ships which brought back tobacco, cotton, sugar
etc.

Sugar plantations in the West Indies also played
a big part in the slave trade of course, but that's
another story


michael adams

....