On 08/09/2019 19:57, michael adams wrote:
"tim..." wrote in message ...

but they can't live or work here once they get here, because employers/landlords are
supposed to check their eligibility

So that seems to be one of the *actual* reasons for people
voting for Brexit, blown to smithereens in one sentence.

Have you told many other people about this ?

Why is it blown to smithereens? Checks are made now and have been for
some years. As a contractor who moves around various clients and through
various agencies, I am asked to prove my right to work in the UK every time.

At the moment, before Brexit, any EU national *does* have the right to
work here, once out, new arrivals will need permission and so numbers
become controlled.

SteveW

On 08/09/2019 22:50, Steve Walker wrote:

The problem with chlorinated chicken is simply that it is used to "hide"
the poor animal welfare, sanitary controls and transportation of "some"
suppliers, all leading to far higher levels of contamination than in the
EU.

That used to be the explanation for curry too, didn't it?

I don't recall there was any foundation for that either.

On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 06:00:33 +0000 (UTC), Brian Reay
wrote:

Rambo wrote:
On Sat, 7 Sep 2019 20:09:09 +0100, Brian Reay wrote:

On 07/09/2019 19:54, tim... wrote:


"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 07/09/2019 16:16, Keema's Nan wrote:
On 7 Sep 2019, Dave Plowman (News) wrote
(in article ):

In ,
Omega * wrote:
But what is equally as bad is the religion of Brexiteers -
seeking to
impose their views on others.

Yes, but we had GOD on our side, he saw to it we had a million and a
half votes more than the Remainers!

Your god appears rather lacking in power. A decent one would have
given
you a big majority of those entitled to vote. Lets say all those
who voted
voting leave. Very very few would argue about 2/3rds of those
entitled to
vote being in favour or whatever.
*And if you had a decent honest remain god, it would have said ?Ok,
we lost.
Let?s do the gentlemanly thing and let the winners have their way?.
*Brexiteers are still waiting for the virtue signalling, holier than
thou,
sanctimonious remainers to defer to a democratic majority.

And that is the fundamentally scary thing: the WHOLE establishment
media and parliament have united to simply deny that a mjority voted
to leave by any means possible.

They are in effect denying the validity of democracy,
That means we are in effect living in a dictatorship by no one we
know manipulating politicians and media behind the scenes.

It's not about Brexit now. It's about democracy itself.

Or possibly that the Irish border issue did not concern the brexiteer
vote and that no deal was not on the ballot paper.

No amount of huffing and puffing is going to convince the EU that no
deal was ever a realistic threat.

Sort out the Ireland issue and settle for the rest of May's deal.

but there is no May deal without the current Irish solution

A solution suggests there is a problem.

The Irish problem is entirely fabricated by the EU / Ireland. At no
point has the UK suggested a hard border. It is Ireland which is
building border check points, not the UK.

The Irish see this as a way to try and grab NI plus, of course, fear
they will have to contribute to the EU gravy train when the UK stops.

Rubbish ..it's the EU threatening Ireland with sanctions if they don't
impose a hard border..which goes against the Good Friday agreement.


So you are confirming it is the EU creating the problem AND they issue
threats against their own member states.

And these are the people YOU and your fellow Remainers want to remain
associated with.

I've never stated I'm a Remainer.

On 08/09/2019 23:00, Norman Wells wrote:
On 08/09/2019 22:50, Steve Walker wrote:

The problem with chlorinated chicken is simply that it is used to
"hide" the poor animal welfare, sanitary controls and transportation
of "some" suppliers, all leading to far higher levels of contamination
than in the EU.

That used to be the explanation for curry too, didn't it?

I don't recall there was any foundation for that either.

From the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health:

"US chicken has been banned in the EU since 1997 because of this
chlorine washing process. While the chlorine isnt toxic at the levels
being used, US processing plants rely solely on it because their other
hygiene standards are so poor. EU rules dictate that food manufacturers
should focus on overall hygiene to eliminate microorganisms, instead of
using a single chemical decontamination step."

"Recent studies have proved this process to be entirely ineffective in
reducing the presence or virulence of bacteria ... This might account
for why the rate of food poisoning in the US is approximately 10 times
higher than in the UK."

SteveW

In message , Steve Walker
writes
On 08/09/2019 10:29, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Steve Walker
writes
On 08/09/2019 07:10, Stephen Cole wrote:


Whats the point of all of this, Brian? What do you people genuinely
believe were going to gain from all this upheaval and madness?

Freedom to make our own choices, set our own laws, hold our own
government to account for allowing large numbers of immigrants
overloading already limited resources and infrastructure, reduce the
downward pressure on low-end wages.

We don't seem to have any difficulties setting our own laws. Hasn't
Parliament has just set one (subject to Royal assent on Monday)?

Can we decide on whether we want tracking in our new vehicles?

Is this going to be an EU regulation?

Expensive safety systems that make only a little difference to safety,
but render vehicles uneconomic to repair after only slight damage?

Is this going to be an EU regulation?

To reduce or raise import tariffs on certain goods? At what level VAT
should be set? Whether any VAT is due on particular goods?

Yes - the EU is trying to standardise VAT and other taxes. But is this
intolerable? If we're inside the EU, we can always work to try and get
rates changed. [And yes - I know we're not happy with the 'tampon tax'.]
But administrations do need to raise revenue, and VAT (essentially a
simple, modern form of purchase tax) is one way of doing it.

To control immigration? And the list goes on.

We already have far more control than we've bothered to exercise. And
didn't the EU agree to have a look at our situation when Dave Cameron
went to the EU in the spring of 2016?

Yes we can make our own laws - but only if they don't contradict EU
laws or no EU country feels that that law affects their companies more
than others.

What is the latest situation regarding vetoes? Yes, we do have to obey
the rules of the club - but we also help make these rules. Apart from
fish and bent bananas, which laws do we find intolerable?

Look at the ridiculous case of Scotland and now Wales wanting to
introduce a minimum per unit price for alcohol and it being held up as
a number of countries contest it as a restriction of trade.

I agree. There should be free beer for all UK workers. Where's my
nearest Wetherspoons?
--
Ian

Rambo wrote:
On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 06:00:33 +0000 (UTC), Brian Reay
wrote:

Rambo wrote:
On Sat, 7 Sep 2019 20:09:09 +0100, Brian Reay wrote:

On 07/09/2019 19:54, tim... wrote:


"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 07/09/2019 16:16, Keema's Nan wrote:
On 7 Sep 2019, Dave Plowman (News) wrote
(in article ):

In ,
Omega Â* wrote:
But what is equally as bad is the religion of Brexiteers -
seeking to
impose their views on others.

Yes, but we had GOD on our side, he saw to it we had a million and a
half votes more than the Remainers!

Your god appears rather lacking in power. A decent one would have
given
you a big majority of those entitled to vote. Lets say all those
who voted
voting leave. Very very few would argue about 2/3rds of those
entitled to
vote being in favour or whatever.
Â*And if you had a decent honest remain god, it would have said ?Ok,
we lost.
Let?s do the gentlemanly thing and let the winners have their way?.
Â*Brexiteers are still waiting for the virtue signalling, holier than
thou,
sanctimonious remainers to defer to a democratic majority.

And that is the fundamentally scary thing: the WHOLE establishment
media and parliament have united to simply deny that a mjority voted
to leave by any means possible.

They are in effect denying the validity of democracy,
That means we are in effect living in a dictatorship by no one we
know manipulating politicians and media behind the scenes.

It's not about Brexit now. It's about democracy itself.

Or possibly that the Irish border issue did not concern the brexiteer
vote and that no deal was not on the ballot paper.

No amount of huffing and puffing is going to convince the EU that no
deal was ever a realistic threat.

Sort out the Ireland issue and settle for the rest of May's deal.

but there is no May deal without the current Irish solution

A solution suggests there is a problem.

The Irish problem is entirely fabricated by the EU / Ireland. At no
point has the UK suggested a hard border. It is Ireland which is
building border check points, not the UK.

The Irish see this as a way to try and grab NI plus, of course, fear
they will have to contribute to the EU gravy train when the UK stops.

Rubbish ..it's the EU threatening Ireland with sanctions if they don't
impose a hard border..which goes against the Good Friday agreement.


So you are confirming it is the EU creating the problem AND they issue
threats against their own member states.

And these are the people YOU and your fellow Remainers want to remain
associated with.

I've never stated I'm a Remainer.


Your confusion is understandable. Not only is Corbyn €˜confused whether he
is a Remainer, a Leaver, wants an election, ..... so are his senior side
kicks.

What hope is there for a confused follower who cant even remember which
qualifications he has and makes Diane Abbott look intelligent.

Steve Walker wrote:
On 08/09/2019 23:00, Norman Wells wrote:
On 08/09/2019 22:50, Steve Walker wrote:

The problem with chlorinated chicken is simply that it is used to
"hide" the poor animal welfare, sanitary controls and transportation
of "some" suppliers, all leading to far higher levels of contamination
than in the EU.

That used to be the explanation for curry too, didn't it?

I don't recall there was any foundation for that either.

From the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health:

"US chicken has been banned in the EU since 1997 because of this
chlorine washing process. While the chlorine isnt toxic at the levels
being used, US processing plants rely solely on it because their other
hygiene standards are so poor. EU rules dictate that food manufacturers
should focus on overall hygiene to eliminate microorganisms, instead of
using a single chemical decontamination step."

"Recent studies have proved this process to be entirely ineffective in
reducing the presence or virulence of bacteria ... This might account
for why the rate of food poisoning in the US is approximately 10 times
higher than in the UK."

SteveW


Oh dear, you will upset someone by quoting facts.


Whatever you do, dont mention the Americans wash their eggs.....

;-)

"Steve Walker" wrote in message
...
Look at the ridiculous case of Scotland and now Wales wanting
to introduce a minimum per unit price for alcohol and it
being held up as a number of countries contest it
as a restriction of trade.

2012 - 7 years ago

The Scottish Parliament first considered the introduction
of minimum pricing in 2012 but met constant objections from
the SWA the Scotch Whisky Association

Dec 2015 - 4 years ago

quote

[It was only three years later that] the European court has ruled
that the Scottish government's plan to impose a blanket minimum
price for alcohol is in breach of EU free-trade laws.

In a significant blow to one of Nicola Sturgeon's flagship policies,
the European court of justice (ECJ) said the policy could be justified
on health grounds under EU law only if it was more proportionate
and effective than using general taxation.

The ECJ returned the case to Scotland's civil courts for a final ruling,

quote


https://www.theguardian.com/society/...aw-court-rules


Sep 2017 - 2 years ago

quote

The UK Supreme Court has ruled that Scotland can set a minimum
price for alcohol, rejecting a challenge by the Scotch Whisky Association
(SWA). Legislation was approved by the Scottish Parliament five years
ago but has
been tied up in court challenges.

quote

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-41981909



Please note challenges were in fact made not by the ECJ -
the UK Supreme Court rejected their reasoning which wasn't
appealed - but the Scottish Whisky Association.

Their reasoning being -



It is the latest twist in a long-running legal battle led
by the Scotch Whisky Association (SWA) after the Scottish
parliament voted in favour of minimum pricing in 2012.
Ministers set the minimum price at 50p per unit of alcohol,
a measure which would see whisky priced at a minimum
of £14 a bottle.


https://www.theguardian.com/society/...aw-court-rules


The Welsh Assembly only decided to introduce such a measure
this year and it was intended to come into effect this summer.
However affected member states have a three month window in
which to object and make their submissions - in this case
that it will affect their exports. At the end of three
months having considered their submission there is no
reason to think that the Supreme Court will not, as in the
case of the SWA dismiss their objections, allowing the
measure to be introduced in 2020. Around four months late.
Which is 4 years and 8 months shorter than the delay
the Scotch Whisky Association imposed on the Scottish
Parliament


Still there's no reason to allow the actual facts to get in the
way of a good rant I suppose.


michael adams

....

In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
On 08/09/2019 12:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
Plus, tariffs are not mandatory. If the EU impose them and cause a
problem that is their problem.

Can I get this clear? In your Utopian UK, after crashing out, you want
the UK to have no tariffs at all on imports?

Have you talked to your idol Trump about this?

Have you actually read Brian's post?

Have you?

It is the choice of the importing nation to set tariffs, or agree an
alternative, ie a deal.

No **** sherlock.

You misunderstand it is not the EU that sets UK import tariffs after a
no deal Brexit.

And you really think the UK would allow in everything tariff free? While
other countries impose tariffs on our goods?

Is this the brave new world of Brexiteer economics?

--
*Why doesn't Tarzan have a beard? *

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

On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 22:18:18 +0000 (UTC), Brian Reay
wrote:

Rambo wrote:
On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 06:00:33 +0000 (UTC), Brian Reay
wrote:

Rambo wrote:
On Sat, 7 Sep 2019 20:09:09 +0100, Brian Reay wrote:

On 07/09/2019 19:54, tim... wrote:


"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 07/09/2019 16:16, Keema's Nan wrote:
On 7 Sep 2019, Dave Plowman (News) wrote
(in article ):

In ,
Omega * wrote:
But what is equally as bad is the religion of Brexiteers -
seeking to
impose their views on others.

Yes, but we had GOD on our side, he saw to it we had a million and a
half votes more than the Remainers!

Your god appears rather lacking in power. A decent one would have
given
you a big majority of those entitled to vote. Lets say all those
who voted
voting leave. Very very few would argue about 2/3rds of those
entitled to
vote being in favour or whatever.
*And if you had a decent honest remain god, it would have said ?Ok,
we lost.
Let?s do the gentlemanly thing and let the winners have their way?.
*Brexiteers are still waiting for the virtue signalling, holier than
thou,
sanctimonious remainers to defer to a democratic majority.

And that is the fundamentally scary thing: the WHOLE establishment
media and parliament have united to simply deny that a mjority voted
to leave by any means possible.

They are in effect denying the validity of democracy,
That means we are in effect living in a dictatorship by no one we
know manipulating politicians and media behind the scenes.

It's not about Brexit now. It's about democracy itself.

Or possibly that the Irish border issue did not concern the brexiteer
vote and that no deal was not on the ballot paper.

No amount of huffing and puffing is going to convince the EU that no
deal was ever a realistic threat.

Sort out the Ireland issue and settle for the rest of May's deal.

but there is no May deal without the current Irish solution

A solution suggests there is a problem.

The Irish problem is entirely fabricated by the EU / Ireland. At no
point has the UK suggested a hard border. It is Ireland which is
building border check points, not the UK.

The Irish see this as a way to try and grab NI plus, of course, fear
they will have to contribute to the EU gravy train when the UK stops.

Rubbish ..it's the EU threatening Ireland with sanctions if they don't
impose a hard border..which goes against the Good Friday agreement.


So you are confirming it is the EU creating the problem AND they issue
threats against their own member states.

And these are the people YOU and your fellow Remainers want to remain
associated with.

I've never stated I'm a Remainer.


Your confusion is understandable. Not only is Corbyn ‘confused’ whether he
is a Remainer, a Leaver, wants an election, ..... so are his senior side
kicks.

What hope is there for a confused follower who can’t even remember which
qualifications he has and makes Diane Abbott look intelligent.

Oh dear..in your haste to cause offense, you only serve to demonstrate
your rather obvious personality disorder.

In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
On 08/09/2019 15:19, Fredxx wrote:
On 08/09/2019 12:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
Plus, tariffs are not mandatory. If the EU impose them and cause a
problem that is their problem.

Can I get this clear? In your Utopian UK, after crashing out, you want
the
UK to have no tariffs at all on imports?

Have you talked to your idol Trump about this?

Have you actually read Brian's post?

It is the choice of the importing nation to set tariffs, or agree an
alternative, ie a deal.

You misunderstand it is not the EU that sets UK import tariffs after a
no deal Brexit.



David is a Remainer, you can't expect him to read things let alone
understand even the most basic concepts.

You are utterly mad if you think the UK would accept the EU (or anyone)
imposing tariffs on its exports while refraining from doing so to theirs.

But perhaps it means you now think trading under WTO terms isn't quite the
answer so many said it would be.

--
*A woman drove me to drink and I didn't have the decency to thank her

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

In article ,
tim... wrote:
Otherwise as Dave says the alien EU hordes can pitch up in
Dublin, take a bus to Belfast and catch the next ferry
to Stranraer.

they can

but they can't live or work here once they get here, because
employers/landlords are supposed to check their eligibility

Lots of things are supposed to be done. Like stopping illegal drugs
entering this country. Very successful that one.

That's the enforcement mechanism

Enforcing anything needs policing. And worrying about landlords or
employers doing things cash in hand are going to be somewhat down the list
of priorities.

--
*Gravity is a myth, the earth sucks *

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

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...


"michael adams" wrote in message
...

"tim..." wrote in message ...

but they can't live or work here once they get here, because employers/landlords are
supposed to check their eligibility

So that seems to be one of the *actual* reasons for people
voting for Brexit, blown to smithereens in one sentence.

Nope, because that isnt the case with the UK still in the EU, stupid.

The reason many people say they voted for Brexit was to
control illegal immigration. The fact, that like so many
of the reasons people gave for voting Brexit this is
totally stupid and illogical, is rather besides the
point.

Anyway thank you for giving me the opportunity to explain
this point to you; along with any others who like yourself
find yourselves at the back of the class.

And there were coats and bags on those "empty" seats which
Corbyn passed which didn't appear on that film, which only
showed the backs of the seats. Not that vindication in
this matter is going to do very much for Corbyn's appeal
or popularity among the public at large. Had he in fact
been blind drunk like an Australian politician and actually
chinned somebody he would have probably come out of
it better.


michael adams

....

In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
Look at the ridiculous case of Scotland and now Wales wanting to
introduce a minimum per unit price for alcohol and it being held up as a
number of countries contest it as a restriction of trade.

Scotland introduced a minimum price per unit of alcohol ages ago. That's
why illegal drug use has increased there.

--
*Dancing is a perpendicular expression of a horizontal desire *

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

In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
The problem with chlorinated chicken is simply that it is used to "hide"
the poor animal welfare, sanitary controls and transportation of "some"
suppliers, all leading to far higher levels of contamination than in the
EU. I am more concerned about about the welfare (I am a confirmed meat
eater, but see no reason to treat animals worse than is necessary) and
the fact that chlorination not only doesn't kill all the contamination,
but also prevents it being accurately checked. Figures clearly show that
the US rate of food poisoning is many times that in the UK.

That won't go down well with the average right wing Brexiteer here. The
only animals they likely care about the welfare of - including humans -
being dogs and horses.

--
*He who laughs last, thinks slowest.

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

In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
And, as I have said to you many times, they arrive in the UK as
visitors, without the correct paperwork to gain employment, claim
benefits, use the NHS, rent a home, etc.

You really think you need paperwork to get a job or a room in the UK? Or
for emergency medical treatment?

--
*Geeks shall inherit the earth *

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

On 08/09/2019 22:39, Steve Walker wrote:

snip

Yes we can make our own laws - but only if they don't contradict EU laws
or no EU country feels that that law affects their companies more than
others. Look at the ridiculous case of Scotland and now Wales wanting to
introduce a minimum per unit price for alcohol and it being held up as a
number of countries contest it as a restriction of trade.

As an aside I never understood the idea. Why not increase duty to raise
the minimum price rather than increase supermarket profit margins?

On 08/09/2019 23:57, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
The problem with chlorinated chicken is simply that it is used to "hide"
the poor animal welfare, sanitary controls and transportation of "some"
suppliers, all leading to far higher levels of contamination than in the
EU. I am more concerned about about the welfare (I am a confirmed meat
eater, but see no reason to treat animals worse than is necessary) and
the fact that chlorination not only doesn't kill all the contamination,
but also prevents it being accurately checked. Figures clearly show that
the US rate of food poisoning is many times that in the UK.

That won't go down well with the average right wing Brexiteer here. The
only animals they likely care about the welfare of - including humans -
being dogs and horses.

Why? So long as it is well labelled and customers have the choice.

On 08/09/2019 23:59, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
And, as I have said to you many times, they arrive in the UK as
visitors, without the correct paperwork to gain employment, claim
benefits, use the NHS, rent a home, etc.

You really think you need paperwork to get a job

Yes, ask Mark Harper what happens if the employee doesn't have the right
to work here.


https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...arpers-3130083

More fines the merrier.

On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 22:18:18 +0000 (UTC), Brian Reay
wrote:

Rambo wrote:
On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 06:00:33 +0000 (UTC), Brian Reay
wrote:

Rambo wrote:
On Sat, 7 Sep 2019 20:09:09 +0100, Brian Reay wrote:

On 07/09/2019 19:54, tim... wrote:


"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 07/09/2019 16:16, Keema's Nan wrote:
On 7 Sep 2019, Dave Plowman (News) wrote
(in article ):

In ,
Omega * wrote:
But what is equally as bad is the religion of Brexiteers -
seeking to
impose their views on others.

Yes, but we had GOD on our side, he saw to it we had a million and a
half votes more than the Remainers!

Your god appears rather lacking in power. A decent one would have
given
you a big majority of those entitled to vote. Lets say all those
who voted
voting leave. Very very few would argue about 2/3rds of those
entitled to
vote being in favour or whatever.
*And if you had a decent honest remain god, it would have said ?Ok,
we lost.
Let?s do the gentlemanly thing and let the winners have their way?.
*Brexiteers are still waiting for the virtue signalling, holier than
thou,
sanctimonious remainers to defer to a democratic majority.

And that is the fundamentally scary thing: the WHOLE establishment
media and parliament have united to simply deny that a mjority voted
to leave by any means possible.

They are in effect denying the validity of democracy,
That means we are in effect living in a dictatorship by no one we
know manipulating politicians and media behind the scenes.

It's not about Brexit now. It's about democracy itself.

Or possibly that the Irish border issue did not concern the brexiteer
vote and that no deal was not on the ballot paper.

No amount of huffing and puffing is going to convince the EU that no
deal was ever a realistic threat.

Sort out the Ireland issue and settle for the rest of May's deal.

but there is no May deal without the current Irish solution

A solution suggests there is a problem.

The Irish problem is entirely fabricated by the EU / Ireland. At no
point has the UK suggested a hard border. It is Ireland which is
building border check points, not the UK.

The Irish see this as a way to try and grab NI plus, of course, fear
they will have to contribute to the EU gravy train when the UK stops.

Rubbish ..it's the EU threatening Ireland with sanctions if they don't
impose a hard border..which goes against the Good Friday agreement.


So you are confirming it is the EU creating the problem AND they issue
threats against their own member states.

And these are the people YOU and your fellow Remainers want to remain
associated with.

I've never stated I'm a Remainer.


Your confusion is understandable. Not only is Corbyn ‘confused’ whether he
is a Remainer, a Leaver, wants an election, ..... so are his senior side
kicks.

What hope is there for a confused follower who can’t even remember which
qualifications he has and makes Diane Abbott look intelligent.

Wottan idiot. Another clueless knuckledragger who is totally blinkered
to the idea that anyone can be other than for or against.

Cameron has a lot to answer for, his actions brought all these IQ
zeros into being. The yes/ no referendum allowed stupid morons to have
an input into a subject they were totally clueless about, and they
never will have the ability to understand even a direct cause and
effect, let alone the nuances that will result in misery for so many.

And guess what knuckledragger, I am for Brexit. I want to clean up
Europe and continue having a damn good laugh at you stupid morons as
you blunder about trashing your country.

You don't have enough liars incidentally. Bozo needs help. The odd
sentence is almost plausible.

AB

On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 21:56:34 +0100, "michael adams"
mjadams25@ukonline wrote:


"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp Esq" wrote in message
.. .

* Immigration authorities may also require you to have valid
official photo-identification which shows your nationality.*
As I pointed out it is totally academic as the same conditions would
apply to anyone entering a port or Airside.

The other minor problem you might have with your argument is that you
can travel to Ireland on a driving licence if going by air. A passport
or proof of nationality is not required.

AB

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
Keema's Nan wrote:
And the leave
campaign were adamant the EU would give in to our every demand, just to
keep a trade deal. Since they needed us more than we needed them.

A situation which, with remain losers in parliament undermining the
negotiating position at every turn, we have never even come near to
testing to our advantage.

Ah - that old chestnut. The EU is simply bluffing. For the last 3 years
while the UK runs round like headless chickens seeking chlorine.

And only good 'ol Boris can call their bluff. While not even being in the
same room as the game.

Be good to here where he's succeeded before.

The olympics where delivered on time and on budget.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
On 08/09/2019 15:19, Fredxx wrote:
On 08/09/2019 12:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
Plus, tariffs are not mandatory. If the EU impose them and cause a
problem that is their problem.

Can I get this clear? In your Utopian UK, after crashing out, you want
the
UK to have no tariffs at all on imports?

Have you talked to your idol Trump about this?

Have you actually read Brian's post?

It is the choice of the importing nation to set tariffs, or agree an
alternative, ie a deal.

You misunderstand it is not the EU that sets UK import tariffs after a
no deal Brexit.



David is a Remainer, you can't expect him to read things let alone
understand even the most basic concepts.

You are utterly mad if you think the UK would accept the EU (or anyone)
imposing tariffs on its exports while refraining from doing so to theirs.

Where did I suggest that?

However, read YOUR post again. It is significant YOU acknowledged the EU
would be the first to initiate the imposition of tariffs. Clearly even you
acknowledge the EU are the problem here.

Hoist by your own petard.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
The problem with chlorinated chicken is simply that it is used to "hide"
the poor animal welfare, sanitary controls and transportation of "some"
suppliers, all leading to far higher levels of contamination than in the
EU. I am more concerned about about the welfare (I am a confirmed meat
eater, but see no reason to treat animals worse than is necessary) and
the fact that chlorination not only doesn't kill all the contamination,
but also prevents it being accurately checked. Figures clearly show that
the US rate of food poisoning is many times that in the UK.

That won't go down well with the average right wing Brexiteer here. The
only animals they likely care about the welfare of - including humans -
being dogs and horses.


Another sweeping and incorrect generalisation.

Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp Esq wrote:
On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 22:18:18 +0000 (UTC), Brian Reay
wrote:

Rambo wrote:
On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 06:00:33 +0000 (UTC), Brian Reay
wrote:

Rambo wrote:
On Sat, 7 Sep 2019 20:09:09 +0100, Brian Reay wrote:

On 07/09/2019 19:54, tim... wrote:


"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 07/09/2019 16:16, Keema's Nan wrote:
On 7 Sep 2019, Dave Plowman (News) wrote
(in article ):

In ,
Omega Â* wrote:
But what is equally as bad is the religion of Brexiteers -
seeking to
impose their views on others.

Yes, but we had GOD on our side, he saw to it we had a million and a
half votes more than the Remainers!

Your god appears rather lacking in power. A decent one would have
given
you a big majority of those entitled to vote. Lets say all those
who voted
voting leave. Very very few would argue about 2/3rds of those
entitled to
vote being in favour or whatever.
Â*And if you had a decent honest remain god, it would have said ?Ok,
we lost.
Let?s do the gentlemanly thing and let the winners have their way?.
Â*Brexiteers are still waiting for the virtue signalling, holier than
thou,
sanctimonious remainers to defer to a democratic majority.

And that is the fundamentally scary thing: the WHOLE establishment
media and parliament have united to simply deny that a mjority voted
to leave by any means possible.

They are in effect denying the validity of democracy,
That means we are in effect living in a dictatorship by no one we
know manipulating politicians and media behind the scenes.

It's not about Brexit now. It's about democracy itself.

Or possibly that the Irish border issue did not concern the brexiteer
vote and that no deal was not on the ballot paper.

No amount of huffing and puffing is going to convince the EU that no
deal was ever a realistic threat.

Sort out the Ireland issue and settle for the rest of May's deal.

but there is no May deal without the current Irish solution

A solution suggests there is a problem.

The Irish problem is entirely fabricated by the EU / Ireland. At no
point has the UK suggested a hard border. It is Ireland which is
building border check points, not the UK.

The Irish see this as a way to try and grab NI plus, of course, fear
they will have to contribute to the EU gravy train when the UK stops.

Rubbish ..it's the EU threatening Ireland with sanctions if they don't
impose a hard border..which goes against the Good Friday agreement.


So you are confirming it is the EU creating the problem AND they issue
threats against their own member states.

And these are the people YOU and your fellow Remainers want to remain
associated with.

I've never stated I'm a Remainer.


Your confusion is understandable. Not only is Corbyn ‘confused’ whether he
is a Remainer, a Leaver, wants an election, ..... so are his senior side
kicks.

What hope is there for a confused follower who canÂ’t even remember which
qualifications he has and makes Diane Abbott look intelligent.

Wottan idiot. Another clueless knuckledragger who is totally blinkered
to the idea that anyone can be other than for or against.

Cameron has a lot to answer for, his actions brought all these IQ
zeros into being. The yes/ no referendum allowed stupid morons to have
an input into a subject they were totally clueless about, and they
never will have the ability to understand even a direct cause and
effect, let alone the nuances that will result in misery for so many.

And guess what knuckledragger, I am for Brexit. I want to clean up
Europe and continue having a damn good laugh at you stupid morons as
you blunder about trashing your country.

You don't have enough liars incidentally. Bozo needs help. The odd
sentence is almost plausible.

AB



I thought Rambo was a unique specimen of his type of idiocy. It seems he
has a fellow traveler.

"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp Esq" wrote in message
...

The other minor problem you might have with your argument is that you
can travel to Ireland on a driving licence if going by air. A passport
or proof of nationality is not required.

I don't have any problem with my argument, minor or otherwise

08/09/2019

"michael adams" wrote in message
...

Freedom of movement between the UK and the RoI only applies
to citizens of the UK and RoI and for this reason citizens
of the UK and RoI can be asked to produce proof of
nationality which normally means a passport or a driving
licence.

While you on the face of it, do appear to be suffering from short
term memory problems.

And again you're becoming confused. What airlines may require
to establish personal ID and what immigration officers may
require in order to establish nationality are two different
things. However on the mainland UK photo driving licences
were only introduced in 1998*. and while people are only
required to obtain a replacement at the age of 70 there
are quite possibly plenty of paper licences still in use.
Which are both perfectly legal and of no use whatsoever as
proof of ID in any situation.

Which would seem to make your short term memory problem
all the more tragic, given that you appear to be too young
to remember any of this. Unless of course you've got long term
memory problems as well, of course.


And as you're here, here's one you posted earlier -

"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp Esq" wrote in message
...

According to the instructions, proof of ID is needed. You obviously
don't read your dockyard/ ferry terminal entrance gates.

There you go with those dockyards again; when as was previously
explained -

OED
dockyard /dkjd/ n. E18. [f. DOCK n.3 + YARD n.1] An area with
docks and workshops for the building, outfit, and repair of ships;
esp. a Government establishment of this kind for the use of the
Royal Navy. Comb.:

What's the point I ask myself ?

So that's short term memory problems, potential long term memory
problems, evident bewilderment, illiteracy and Tourettes.

You seem to be even worse off than Speed.

That's assuming there's nothing else you'd like to share ?




michael adams

....

On Mon, 9 Sep 2019 16:16:36 +1000, jeikppkywk, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:


Ah - that old chestnut. The EU is simply bluffing. For the last 3 years
while the UK runs round like headless chickens seeking chlorine.

And only good 'ol Boris can call their bluff. While not even being in the
same room as the game.

Be good to here where he's succeeded before.

The olympics where delivered on time and on budget.

That was HIS job, senile idiot? Just HOW senile are you? LOL

--
about senile Rot Speed:
"This is like having a conversation with someone with brain damage."
MID:

Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Brian Reay
wrote:

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
The problem with chlorinated chicken is simply that it is used to "hide"
the poor animal welfare, sanitary controls and transportation of "some"
suppliers, all leading to far higher levels of contamination than in the
EU. I am more concerned about about the welfare (I am a confirmed meat
eater, but see no reason to treat animals worse than is necessary) and
the fact that chlorination not only doesn't kill all the contamination,
but also prevents it being accurately checked. Figures clearly show that
the US rate of food poisoning is many times that in the UK.

That won't go down well with the average right wing Brexiteer here. The
only animals they likely care about the welfare of - including humans -
being dogs and horses.

Another sweeping and incorrect generalisation.

It's all you ever get from Our Dave - haven't you noticed?


I think that is unfair.

He also produces a lot of bovine muck. He must have a wonderful compost
heap ;-)

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
On 08/09/2019 15:19, Fredxx wrote:
On 08/09/2019 12:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
Plus, tariffs are not mandatory. If the EU impose them and cause a
problem that is their problem.

Can I get this clear? In your Utopian UK, after crashing out, you want
the
UK to have no tariffs at all on imports?

Have you talked to your idol Trump about this?

Have you actually read Brian's post?

It is the choice of the importing nation to set tariffs, or agree an
alternative, ie a deal.

You misunderstand it is not the EU that sets UK import tariffs after a
no deal Brexit.



David is a Remainer, you can't expect him to read things let alone
understand even the most basic concepts.

You are utterly mad if you think the UK would accept the EU (or anyone)
imposing tariffs on its exports while refraining from doing so to theirs.

but we are

we have already published our proposed scale of charges (Norman probably
knows where it is)

and, from examples that have been discussed, for many items the tariffs are
much lower than EU tariffs

tim

"Brian Reay" wrote in message
...
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
On 08/09/2019 15:19, Fredxx wrote:
On 08/09/2019 12:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
Plus, tariffs are not mandatory. If the EU impose them and cause a
problem that is their problem.

Can I get this clear? In your Utopian UK, after crashing out, you want
the
UK to have no tariffs at all on imports?

Have you talked to your idol Trump about this?

Have you actually read Brian's post?

It is the choice of the importing nation to set tariffs, or agree an
alternative, ie a deal.

You misunderstand it is not the EU that sets UK import tariffs after a
no deal Brexit.



David is a Remainer, you can't expect him to read things let alone
understand even the most basic concepts.

You are utterly mad if you think the UK would accept the EU (or anyone)
imposing tariffs on its exports while refraining from doing so to theirs.

Where did I suggest that?

However, read YOUR post again. It is significant YOU acknowledged the EU
would be the first to initiate the imposition of tariffs.

the EU don't do anything here.

They have a tariff of charges that applies to "other" countries

as soon as we become an "other" country they will automatically apply to us

tim

In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
Look at the ridiculous case of Scotland and now Wales wanting to
introduce a minimum per unit price for alcohol and it being held up as
a number of countries contest it as a restriction of trade.

Scotland introduced a minimum price per unit of alcohol ages ago.

1 May 2018 to be accuate.

That's why illegal drug use has increased there.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

In article , Archibald Tarquin
Blenkinsopp Esq wrote:
On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 21:56:34 +0100, "michael adams" mjadams25@ukonline
wrote:


"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp Esq" wrote in
message ...

* Immigration authorities may also require you to have valid official
photo-identification which shows your nationality.*
As I pointed out it is totally academic as the same conditions would
apply to anyone entering a port or Airside.

The other minor problem you might have with your argument is that you can
travel to Ireland on a driving licence if going by air. A passport or
proof of nationality is not required.

It's not a legal requirement, but then airline won't take you - their rules

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
On 08/09/2019 12:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
Plus, tariffs are not mandatory. If the EU impose them and cause a
problem that is their problem.

Can I get this clear? In your Utopian UK, after crashing out, you want
the UK to have no tariffs at all on imports?

Have you talked to your idol Trump about this?

Have you actually read Brian's post?

Have you?

It is the choice of the importing nation to set tariffs, or agree an
alternative, ie a deal.

No **** sherlock.

You misunderstand it is not the EU that sets UK import tariffs after a
no deal Brexit.

And you really think the UK would allow in everything tariff free? While
other countries impose tariffs on our goods?

Not everything no. It's certain we'll impose tariffs on finished goods (to
encourage manufacturing in the UK, from imported tariff free components)

But there seems to be a move for zero tariffs on agriculture, as we are not
self sufficient in food and (except in a few cases) have no need to
discourage importation of such - that doesn't mean that there won't be
minimum standards of production enforced.

tim

On 09/09/2019 08:55, tim... wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Â* Brian Reay wrote:
On 08/09/2019 15:19, Fredxx wrote:
On 08/09/2019 12:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â*Â*Â* Brian Reay wrote:
Plus, tariffs are not mandatory. If the EU impose them and cause a
problem that is their problem.

Can I get this clear? In your Utopian UK, after crashing out, you
want
the
UK to have no tariffs at all on imports?

Have you talked to your idol Trump about this?

Have you actually read Brian's post?

It is the choice of the importing nation to set tariffs, or agree an
alternative, ie a deal.

You misunderstand it is not the EU that sets UK import tariffs after a
no deal Brexit.



David is a Remainer, you can't expect him to read things let alone
understand even the most basic concepts.

You are utterly mad if you think the UK would accept the EU (or anyone)
imposing tariffs on its exports while refraining from doing so to theirs.

but we are

we have already published our proposed scale of charges (Norman probably
knows where it is)

and, from examples that have been discussed, for many items the tariffs
are much lower than EU tariffs

It's he

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/t...exit-published

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
.. .

Article 50 rules, which are subject to EU law, state that the decision
on whether or not to request any extension rests solely with the
Executive, i.e. the PM in our case.

So EU Law determines that the Executive in our case has to be the PM
does it ?

(Not having read article 50 myself, to me the giveaway in your
explanation there is the understandable lack of any specific
mention of "Prime Minister" or similar. As in a Court
of Law I very much doubt phrases, such as "i.e.", in other words
unwarranted assumptions a party hopes to gloss over will
actually cut much ice.

Quite possibly your legal advisor has told you different - well
to coin an old phrase "he would [do] wouldn't he" as he trousers
his fee,

Or are you seriously suggesting that there's a big EU Rule book
which specifies the unchanging Constitutional arrangements
both written and unwritten, which must be maintained and adhered
to, by each ,member State in Perpetuity ?

Your legal advisor didn't happen to mention that one, did he ?

Don't tell me. You've already paid him 50K up front.


michael adams

....

"Ian Jackson" wrote in message
...
In message , Steve Walker
writes
On 08/09/2019 10:29, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Steve Walker
writes
On 08/09/2019 07:10, Stephen Cole wrote:


Whats the point of all of this, Brian? What do you people genuinely
believe were going to gain from all this upheaval and madness?

Freedom to make our own choices, set our own laws, hold our own
government to account for allowing large numbers of immigrants
overloading already limited resources and infrastructure, reduce the
downward pressure on low-end wages.

We don't seem to have any difficulties setting our own laws. Hasn't
Parliament has just set one (subject to Royal assent on Monday)?

Can we decide on whether we want tracking in our new vehicles?

Is this going to be an EU regulation?


already part way there with eCall.

Expensive safety systems that make only a little difference to safety, but
render vehicles uneconomic to repair after only slight damage?

Is this going to be an EU regulation?

Yes

already planned for introduction about 2021

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/i...e-mandatory-eu

Though I'm not convinced about the uneconomic to repair after only slight
damage, part

ISTM the nonsense of keyless entry is more likely to make cars uneconomic to
repair

To reduce or raise import tariffs on certain goods? At what level VAT
should be set? Whether any VAT is due on particular goods?

Yes - the EU is trying to standardise VAT and other taxes. But is this
intolerable? If we're inside the EU, we can always work to try and get
rates changed. [And yes - I know we're not happy with the 'tampon tax'.]
But administrations do need to raise revenue, and VAT (essentially a
simple, modern form of purchase tax) is one way of doing it.

To control immigration? And the list goes on.

We already have far more control than we've bothered to exercise. And
didn't the EU agree to have a look at our situation when Dave Cameron went
to the EU in the spring of 2016?

Yes we can make our own laws - but only if they don't contradict EU laws
or no EU country feels that that law affects their companies more than
others.

What is the latest situation regarding vetoes? Yes, we do have to obey the
rules of the club - but we also help make these rules. Apart from fish and
bent bananas, which laws do we find intolerable?

the ports directive

"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 08/09/2019 22:39, Steve Walker wrote:

snip

Yes we can make our own laws - but only if they don't contradict EU laws
or no EU country feels that that law affects their companies more than
others. Look at the ridiculous case of Scotland and now Wales wanting to
introduce a minimum per unit price for alcohol and it being held up as a
number of countries contest it as a restriction of trade.

As an aside I never understood the idea. Why not increase duty to raise
the minimum price rather than increase supermarket profit margins?

because that increases the price of premium products as well

tim

"Norman Wells" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2019 08:55, tim... wrote:

we have already published our proposed scale of charges (Norman probably knows where
it is)

and, from examples that have been discussed, for many items the tariffs are much lower
than EU tariffs

It's he

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/t...exit-published


Those tarriffs are for imports. Which can indeed be set by the UK Govt.

Where are the UK Govt projections of the tarriffs likely to be imposed on UK exports ?

Have they been published anywhere ?

Or are the Govt secretly hoping that our competitors will somehow take pity on us ?


michael adams

....

"Brian Reay" wrote in message
...
Rambo wrote:
On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 06:00:33 +0000 (UTC), Brian Reay
wrote:

Rambo wrote:
On Sat, 7 Sep 2019 20:09:09 +0100, Brian Reay wrote:

On 07/09/2019 19:54, tim... wrote:


"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 07/09/2019 16:16, Keema's Nan wrote:
On 7 Sep 2019, Dave Plowman (News) wrote
(in article ):

In ,
Omega wrote:
But what is equally as bad is the religion of Brexiteers -
seeking to
impose their views on others.

Yes, but we had GOD on our side, he saw to it we had a million
and a
half votes more than the Remainers!

Your god appears rather lacking in power. A decent one would have
given
you a big majority of those entitled to vote. Lets say all those
who voted
voting leave. Very very few would argue about 2/3rds of those
entitled to
vote being in favour or whatever.
And if you had a decent honest remain god, it would have said
?Ok,
we lost.
Let?s do the gentlemanly thing and let the winners have their
way?.
Brexiteers are still waiting for the virtue signalling, holier
than
thou,
sanctimonious remainers to defer to a democratic majority.

And that is the fundamentally scary thing: the WHOLE establishment
media and parliament have united to simply deny that a mjority
voted
to leave by any means possible.

They are in effect denying the validity of democracy,
That means we are in effect living in a dictatorship by no one we
know manipulating politicians and media behind the scenes.

It's not about Brexit now. It's about democracy itself.

Or possibly that the Irish border issue did not concern the
brexiteer
vote and that no deal was not on the ballot paper.

No amount of huffing and puffing is going to convince the EU that no
deal was ever a realistic threat.

Sort out the Ireland issue and settle for the rest of May's deal.

but there is no May deal without the current Irish solution

A solution suggests there is a problem.

The Irish problem is entirely fabricated by the EU / Ireland. At no
point has the UK suggested a hard border. It is Ireland which is
building border check points, not the UK.

The Irish see this as a way to try and grab NI plus, of course, fear
they will have to contribute to the EU gravy train when the UK stops.

Rubbish ..it's the EU threatening Ireland with sanctions if they don't
impose a hard border..which goes against the Good Friday agreement.


So you are confirming it is the EU creating the problem AND they issue
threats against their own member states.

And these are the people YOU and your fellow Remainers want to remain
associated with.

I've never stated I'm a Remainer.


Your confusion is understandable. Not only is Corbyn €˜confused whether
he
is a Remainer, a Leaver, wants an election, ..... so are his senior side
kicks.

What hope is there for a confused follower who cant even remember which
qualifications he has and makes Diane Abbott look intelligent.

doesn't he have an Education degree for teaching geography :-)

tim

"michael adams" mjadams25@ukonline wrote in message
...

"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp Esq" wrote in
message ...

* Immigration authorities may also require you to have valid
official photo-identification which shows your nationality.*
As you are being asked to prove that you are an
Irish or UK citizen who is entitled to avail of the Common
Travel Area arrangements, it is advisable to travel with your
passport.

Is May and adviseable now a legal requirement then?

Immigration authorities may exercise their *discretion* as to
whether they require you to offer proof of your nationality, or
not, on any particular occasion. The criteria they may use are
deliberately inscrutable and not amenable to discussion as
a matter of policy.

surely, as it's an open border there wont be any immigration official there
in the first place (just like there aren't if you drive over a border)

we have austerity

why spend money on something that we don't need

tim