On Sunday, 22 September 2019 01:42:47 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 21 Sep 2019 15:05:51 +0000, Spike
wrote:

On 21/09/2019 12:19, T i m wrote:

Correct, but not because we believe in any hype or spin, put out by
the Brexiteers but because we haven't seen anything yet that justifies
the whole clusterfcuk to 'most people'.

How about 'that's what people voted for?'

And again, by 'the people' you mean *only* 1/3rd of those eligible to
vote *then*.

yes, why do you want to include the dead and those not eligible to vote.
Why do you want people like wodney to be given the vote on what happens in the UK, would you like the russians to also get a vote.
And what of those that decide they do not want to vote ?
Will you make a vote up for them or just have them executed if they didnlt vote to live the way you think they should.




Remember, 2/3rds of people didn't vote to Remain - according to your
method of counting.

Whoosh.

A true fact you are still failing to understabnd pretty much like yuor 2+2 equals 4 when everyone knows that the term 2+2 means the 2+2=5 .





It wasn't (actually) a vote for who want's to carry on doing the same,
it was a vote for who want's to change.

No it wasn't.
Just because you didn't understand the ballot paper, in a similar way to the person that drew the penis on the paper you made a simialr choice.
------------------------
The proposed question was accepted by the government in September 2015, shortly before the bill's third reading.[50] The question that appeared on ballot papers in the referendum under the Act was:

Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

with the responses to the question to be (to be marked with a single (X)):

Remain a member of the European Union
Leave the European Union

-----------------
It DID NOT SAY WHO WANTS CHNAGE or anything else that you've dreamed up

As with GE yuo are asked to put a mark next to your chosen option,
they have NEVER said do you want the curretn party to remain in power Yes or No.

I find it strange that only about 0.05% of the population didn't understand the Q on the ballot paper, but it doesn't suprise me that you were one of them.
0.05% isn't a majority or a Supermajority either.






Only 1/3rd of the electorate voted *for* that, for the change.

and less than a 1/3rd voted to remain.
That IS NOT a Supermajority.

Maybe you sould consider a basic course in maths.


Cheers, T i m

On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 10:35:52 +0000, Spike
wrote:

On 23/09/2019 08:45, dennis@home wrote:
On 23/09/2019 08:43, Spike wrote:
On 22/09/2019 13:23, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Spike wrote:
On 18/09/2019 09:36, T i m wrote:

We weren't ready
because the majority (the 2/3rds that didn't vote to Leave) didn't
have a reason to.

What a silly argument. By the same token 2/3rds didn't vote for Remain.

Those who voted remain or abstained knew exactly what they were voting

I can't find a single Remainer who knows what rules, regulation,
directives, and other edicts have been imposed on the UK by the EU since
the second Referendum in 2016, so to say 'they know what they voted for'
is disingenuous at best. You can describe that as 'the status quo ' if
you wish, but it doesn't changed their ignorance.

Do you want to tell us what you think they are so we can shoot them down
as being untrue?

I'm trying to even just one remainer to say how many new rules, etc,
have been imposed on the UK since June 2016. So far, the silence has
been deafening.

You were the one bringing it up, it's for you to define.

I'm not aware of any rules that have affected me negatively or
positively, or nothing that has actively bothered me or would make me
consider leaving the EU for on the whole.

Nearly everything claimed by brexiteers has been untrue so it would be
interesting if you have some true ones.

Do you want to tell us what you think they are so we can shoot them down
as being untrue?

See above. The Remainers (specifically) and non voters (potentially,
you don't vote for what you already have etc) didn't want this, you
Brexiteers did so it's your responsibility to sell to the others of
the benefits, not the other way round.

The fact that you are cogitating suggests that you can't, and given
how assured most fanatical Brexiteers are that 'we will be better off'
and 'everything will be ok', out of the EU, we assume you have some
pretty strong evidence to support such?

That or you have just cleaned your crystal ball and are getting an
even sharper picture? Or has the 'Wheel of fortune' pointer just
landed on Leave again ... (you know, the one supplied free with your
Fanatic Brexiteer club membership and only has 'Leave', 'Leave at any
cost', 'Leave, even with no deal, no matter what that may cost
everyone or how unrepresentative that is of the will of the people,
especially 3+ years on ...' segments on it?) ;-)

Cheers, T i m

In article ,
Spike wrote:
I'm trying to even just one remainer to say how many new rules, etc,
have been imposed on the UK since June 2016. So far, the silence has
been deafening.


They can't have had much of an impact on you if you can't even name one.

Do you refuse to update the system on your computer since you're so
against any new rules on principle?

--
*I have plenty of talent and vision. I just don't care.

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

On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 02:38:49 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:


26 Reasons for Leaving the EU.

We have made a step closer today (with the demise of Thomas Cook) re
fixing two problems.

All these holiday migrants, flying to places in the EU (and further),
spending all their money there and polluting the atmosphere in the
process!

Go there, burn their skin, get ill and then come home to burden the
NHS with skin cancers and drink related issues.

Cheers, T i m

On 23/09/2019 11:35, Spike wrote:
On 23/09/2019 08:45, dennis@home wrote:
On 23/09/2019 08:43, Spike wrote:
On 22/09/2019 13:23, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Spike wrote:
On 18/09/2019 09:36, T i m wrote:

We weren't ready
because the majority (the 2/3rds that didn't vote to Leave) didn't
have a reason to.

What a silly argument. By the same token 2/3rds didn't vote for Remain.

Those who voted remain or abstained knew exactly what they were voting

I can't find a single Remainer who knows what rules, regulation,
directives, and other edicts have been imposed on the UK by the EU since
the second Referendum in 2016, so to say 'they know what they voted for'
is disingenuous at best. You can describe that as 'the status quo ' if
you wish, but it doesn't changed their ignorance.

Do you want to tell us what you think they are so we can shoot them down
as being untrue?

I'm trying to even just one remainer to say how many new rules, etc,
have been imposed on the UK since June 2016. So far, the silence has
been deafening.

OK. I will say zero so you can now list what you think has been done.


Nearly everything claimed by brexiteers has been untrue so it would be
interesting if you have some true ones.

Do you want to tell us what you think they are so we can shoot them down
as being untrue?

everything they put under project fear.

On 23/09/2019 09:48, T i m wrote:

Fact. 2/3rds of the electorate DID NOT vote FOR leaving the EU.

FACT: 2/3rds of the electorate DID NOT vote to REMAIN in the EU.

Because you are a bit slow ... especially for a maths teacher g Only
1/3rd of the electorate voted to leave. Fact.

Because you are a bit slow... Only 1/3rd of the electorate voted to
remain. FACT.

Now, if you think that all that is a clear demonstration of
*anything*, other than it's far from cut and dried that 'the people'
want us out of the EU, then you are only further demonstrating the
fact you are on a personal campaign and aren't interested in what
might actually be best for 'the people'.

Now, if you think that all that is a clear demonstration of *anything*,
other than it's far from cut and dried that 'the people' want us to
remain in the EU, then you are only further demonstrating the fact you
are on a personal campaign and aren't interested in what might actually
be best for 'the people'.


--
Spike

On 23/09/2019 11:05, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
With the whole of the EU to trade with in a frictionless manner, I do
not think the UK's departure will be a problem for long.

I'm sure it won't. The EU export more to us than we do to them. They
need the trade.

The 'they need us more than we need them' gamble?
Going awfully well so far.


The Quislings in Parliament and May are the ones blame for that.

On 22/09/2019 00:42, T i m wrote:
On 21 Sep 2019 15:05:51 +0000, Spike wrote:
On 21/09/2019 12:19, T i m wrote:

Correct, but not because we believe in any hype or spin, put out by
the Brexiteers but because we haven't seen anything yet that justifies
the whole clusterfcuk to 'most people'.

How about 'that's what people voted for?'

And again, by 'the people' you mean *only* 1/3rd of those eligible to
vote *then*.

Remember, 2/3rds of people didn't vote to Remain - according to your
method of counting.

Whoosh.

It wasn't (actually) a vote for who want's to carry on doing the same,
it was a vote for who want's to change.

It was a ballot paper with one question on it, the answers to which
were a choice between LEAVE and REMAIN.

Where is this 'change' you keep banging on about? Both responses include
'change', merely different sorts.

Many of those who voted Remain
did so not because they knew remaining was the best thing for 'most
people' but because they didn't know Leaving was either and the risks
with Leaving were greater.

That's even sillier than you normally seem to manage.

Unfortunately, many Brexiteers *THINK* they
*KNOW* that Leaving *WILL* be best for (at least) *THEM* and that's
all that seems to count.

I think your agenda is showing.

The ONLY vote that would make any difference was the Leave vote.

Why? By staying in, the EU could walk all over us if they wanted.

Their attitude is summed up in Juncker's spiteful comment "If you leave,
we will hurt you"

Whoever wants to belong to that bully-boy outfit?

Only 1/3rd of the electorate voted *for* that, for the change.

Keep telling yourself that those that don't vote, vote for your side -
it's silly enough for you to believe.


--
Spike

On 23/09/2019 09:26, T i m wrote:
On 22 Sep 2019 11:05:36 +0000, Spike wrote:
On 22/09/2019 00:47, T i m wrote:
On 21 Sep 2019 15:06:30 +0000, Spike wrote:
On 21/09/2019 10:39, T i m wrote:
On 21 Sep 2019 09:58:38 +0000, Spike wrote:
On 18/09/2019 09:36, T i m wrote:

We weren't ready because the majority (the 2/3rds that didn't vote to
Leave) didn't have a reason to.

What a silly argument.

Only if you aren't looking at it from the bigger picture.

And that's a silly argument as well.

In your opinion of course ... and you are?

Perhaps you'd care to describe this 'bigger picture' that you have
suddenly introduced to deflect attention from your previous silly argument.

Not suddenly introduced, it's been there all the time and was
considered by some of us at the time of the referendum poll.

I'll not bother explaining it all again as the chances are you still
wouldn't get it.

I think you've made the fundamental error of assuming that everyone has
enough interest in your silly ideas to have read all of your words on
the subject.

snip

You haven't explained any such thing as a 'position', so there is
nothing to 'understand'

I have, several times, sorry it whooshed you.

What such a question doesn't cover is those who might prefer an ice
lolly or just a cold drink.

Part of managing democracy is asking the right questions to the right
people and ensuring enough of them agree to any *change* that doesn't
have a very reasonable predicted outcome for 'most people'.

Is it?

Of course.

Christ on a bike.

I thought it was a car? Wasn't he 'heard on the street in his
Triumph'?

Who are 'the right people'?

Well, those who weren't given the option to have their say then but
are going to have to suffer any negative outcomes for the longest
period (for one group).

But all voters were able to 'have their say'.

MP's have a duty of care to ensure we don't hurt ourselves, like if
50%+1 want crocodiles in all local swimming pools.

MPs have a duty to implement the voters choice, not some made-up fantasy
of yours.

Nope, BS. Shame you actually believe yourself.

What a strange world-view you have -

Oh the irony.

Yet you know little, understand little, can explain little.

we can vote, but only if we are
'the right people' who have been asked 'the right questions' and
therefore 'ensuring' any change beforehand.

See above. Every day a school day for you eh. ;-)

That sounds remarkably like the Soviet system.

Only because you didn't understand the scenario, because you aren't
able to.

I take it you understand nothing about the Soviet system.

We were going along a road that whilst may have had a few bends, was
generally straight and we all had a reasonable idea about what
tomorrow would be like.

Then, a tiny minority of people made the statement that if we turned
of that road, 90 degrees, we would all have better lives, without
anyone actually knowing if that was true or even likely. In fact, some
scouts that looked suggested that it might be a touch of the grass
being greener and could actually just be weed on a stagnant ford.

So, how many rules, regulations, directives, and other imperatives have
been imposed on the UK by the EU since the second referendum vote?

Pass ... but none that have affected 'most people' enough to even have
them on their radar and certainly not enough to lose loads of money
over.

You don't know what has been imposed on you, but can say that 'none' has
affected anyone and no-one has lost shedloads of money?

I never said any such thing.

Yes, you did, six lines of text above

Have you looked at this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally%E2%80%93Anne_test

No.

All I have said is that 'most people' haven't been made worse off by
our membership of the EU, more likely the opposite in fact. And not
just as a function of us having the 4th highest GDP but a quality of
life that many around the world are envious off and want for
themselves, irrespective of how you personally consider it.

Laughable. The current emissions/global warming.climate change agenda
has been foisted on us at least in part by the EU,

Yet 'we' are leading the way apparently?

Thanks for confirming I was correct.

That's affecting
everyone negatively and costing them loads of cash. Have you been asleep
these past few years?

I have had some sleep recently, perhaps you should as well to help you
think clearer?

Did *you* see them all coming?

I'm not the one predicting the future, it's the Brexiteers.

Yet you don't seem to know even what has passed.

No, quite the opposite. You're avoiding the future by sticking your head
in a bucket.

How can we 'avoid the future'. Talk about stupid comments. Many of the
Remainers were going along the 'better the devil you know' direction
which is *exactly* the opposite of how you see it.

And you know this about remainers how, exactly?

Do you always put forward such silly arguments?

Why are you so selfish?

Why are you so dim?

It's not me that is demonstrating a selfish / closed minded attitude
here.

Yet you can't tell me about anything that has been imposed on the UK by
the EU since June 2016.

Aren't you one of 'the right people'?

Funnily enough, no, I'm not. I didn't vote in the poll because unlike
you, I don't have a crystal ball so couldn't be *sure* that leaving
the EU would be better for 'most people'.

From where did you get the silly idea that the referendum paper asked
you to decide that?


--
Spike

In article ,
Spike wrote:
Those who voted remain or abstained knew exactly what they were voting
for. The status quo.

I can't find a single Remainer who knows what rules, regulation,
directives, and other edicts have been imposed on the UK by the EU since
the second Referendum in 2016, so to say 'they know what they voted for'
is disingenuous at best. You can describe that as 'the status quo ' if
you wish, but it doesn't changed their ignorance.

I take it you then know every single 'edict' which has been 'imposed' on
the UK since 2016, then? If not, you must be ignorant too.

The third who voted leave can't even agree among
themselves what this means now. So surely fair to assume many voted on
what the leave campaign promised them? And since so few of those promises
seem attainable in the light of experience, how can you know how they'd
vote now?

What would be 'fair' is to honour the result of the second Referendum.
The EU offered a deal, it was rejected multiple times by Parliament. The
only thing left on the table is a no-deal Brexit.

Oddly, not even Boris is that defeatist. Unless he is lying again too.

--
*Warning: Dates in Calendar are closer than they appear.

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

On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 16:09:22 +0000, Spike
wrote:

snip

It wasn't (actually) a vote for who want's to carry on doing the same,
it was a vote for who want's to change.

It was a ballot paper with one question on it, the answers to which
were a choice between LEAVE and REMAIN.

Oh dear ... you binary brainers must miss so much of the analogue
world that is out there? It's night or day for you isn't it, no dusk
and dawn or dull or bright. ;-(

Where is this 'change' you keep banging on about? Both responses include
'change', merely different sorts.

Idiot.

Change means doing something different. No change means carrying on
doing the same.

Many of those who voted Remain
did so not because they knew remaining was the best thing for 'most
people' but because they didn't know Leaving was either and the risks
with Leaving were greater.

That's even sillier than you normally seem to manage.

Yes Rod.

Unfortunately, many Brexiteers *THINK* they
*KNOW* that Leaving *WILL* be best for (at least) *THEM* and that's
all that seems to count.

I think your agenda is showing.

Not to you it wouldn't, you couldn't find it if it was in a paper bag.

The ONLY vote that would make any difference was the Leave vote.

Why? By staying in, the EU could walk all over us if they wanted.

Yes, loads of things *could* happen if we stay in, a big difference
being we would still have a say in them.

Their attitude is summed up in Juncker's spiteful comment "If you leave,
we will hurt you"

Cancelled by £350M/week to the NHS instead.

Whoever wants to belong to that bully-boy outfit?

2/3rds of the electorate apparently, who didn't answer the poll with
Leave.

Only 1/3rd of the electorate voted *for* that, for the change.

Keep telling yourself that those that don't vote, vote for your side -
it's silly enough for you to believe.

Never said that at all.

What I said and have only said is facts.

We were in the EU so the *focus* is on doing something else.
So, the poll was asking who would like to do that (or it should have
been, till it was *******ised).
People don't always (bother to) vote for what they already have,
especially if they aren't sure of all the variables.

The only people who would see it any other way (other than the way it
actually was) are those who don't give a fcuk about doing what 'the
people' wanted and 2/3rds of 'the people' didn't state they wanted
that change (to leave). In fact, nearly as many who answered the poll
to Leave, specifically answered it to Remain, not bad considering how
people don't vote for what they already have and how many may have
believed the blatant leave lies.

Anyway, you are Rod so I'm out.

Cheers, T i m

In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
On 23/09/2019 11:05, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
With the whole of the EU to trade with in a frictionless manner, I do
not think the UK's departure will be a problem for long.

I'm sure it won't. The EU export more to us than we do to them. They
need the trade.

The 'they need us more than we need them' gamble?
Going awfully well so far.


The Quislings in Parliament and May are the ones blame for that.

Thought you might want to know the meaning of a word you've just used.

Collins GEM English Dictionary
quisling n. traitor who aids an occupying enemy force.


Thought you were a teacher? Did you tolerate the misuse of words then too?

--
*A nest isn't empty until all their stuff is out of the attic

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

Brian Reay wrote:
The Quislings in Parliament and May are the ones blame for that.

Sorry, I've lost track. Are these the Brexit Quislings, the May's deal
Quislings, or the Remain Quislings? What with all the different
invading enemy soldiers on the streets around here, it's a bit
difficult to keep track of which occupying force's collaborators you
might be referring to.

quisling (noun) a traitor who collaborates with an
enemy force occupying their country.

I'm sure there are some perfectly reasonable arguments in favour of
whatever political opinion you might hold. So what's with the whole
fanatical conspiracy-theorist vibe you seem to be channeling? In what
sense do you expect your statement above to actually work?



#Paul

On 23/09/2019 16:38, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Spike wrote:

Those who voted remain or abstained knew exactly what they were voting
for. The status quo.

I can't find a single Remainer who knows what rules, regulation,
directives, and other edicts have been imposed on the UK by the EU since
the second Referendum in 2016, so to say 'they know what they voted for'
is disingenuous at best. You can describe that as 'the status quo ' if
you wish, but it doesn't changed their ignorance.

I take it you then know every single 'edict' which has been 'imposed' on
the UK since 2016, then? If not, you must be ignorant too.

I don't have to, because I'm not the one who said "Those who voted
remain or abstained knew exactly what they were voting for", which is
what I was responding to by asking why the Remain people knew what they
were voting for, when none of them can list anything that has been
imposed on the UK by the EU since the second referendum in June 2106.

The third who voted leave can't even agree among
themselves what this means now. So surely fair to assume many voted on
what the leave campaign promised them? And since so few of those promises
seem attainable in the light of experience, how can you know how they'd
vote now?

What would be 'fair' is to honour the result of the second Referendum.
The EU offered a deal, it was rejected multiple times by Parliament. The
only thing left on the table is a no-deal Brexit.

Oddly, not even Boris is that defeatist. Unless he is lying again too.

So, can *any* Remainer tell us of the rules, regulation, directives,
etc, that have come our way from the EU since June 2016?

Thought not, yet here we are being lumbered with the claptrap that "We
were voting for the status quo" when they have no idea what that status
quo was or how it has changed since then.


--
Spike

On 23/09/2019 16:41, T i m wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 16:09:22 +0000, Spike
wrote:

snip

It wasn't (actually) a vote for who want's to carry on doing the same,
it was a vote for who want's to change.

It was a ballot paper with one question on it, the answers to which
were a choice between LEAVE and REMAIN.

Oh dear ... you binary brainers must miss so much of the analogue
world that is out there? It's night or day for you isn't it, no dusk
and dawn or dull or bright. ;-(

What ballot paper did you see, then? On mine there was one question on
it, the answers to which were a choice between LEAVE and REMAIN. I
didn't see Anna Logue there anywhere.

Where is this 'change' you keep banging on about? Both responses include
'change', merely different sorts.

Idiot.

Getting too close to exposing your shortcomings, am I?

Change means doing something different. No change means carrying on
doing the same.

....even if change is taking place.

Many of those who voted Remain
did so not because they knew remaining was the best thing for 'most
people' but because they didn't know Leaving was either and the risks
with Leaving were greater.

That's even sillier than you normally seem to manage.

Yes Rod.

You seem to be detaching yourself from reality.

Unfortunately, many Brexiteers *THINK* they
*KNOW* that Leaving *WILL* be best for (at least) *THEM* and that's
all that seems to count.

I think your agenda is showing.

Not to you it wouldn't, you couldn't find it if it was in a paper bag.

You seem to be detaching yourself from reality.

The ONLY vote that would make any difference was the Leave vote.

Why? By staying in, the EU could walk all over us if they wanted.

Yes, loads of things *could* happen if we stay in, a big difference
being we would still have a say in them.

That worked well over the last 40 years, didn't it?

Their attitude is summed up in Juncker's spiteful comment "If you leave,
we will hurt you"

Cancelled by �350M/week to the NHS instead.

Whoever wants to belong to that bully-boy outfit?

2/3rds of the electorate apparently, who didn't answer the poll with
Leave.

2/3rds of the electorate didn't answer the poll with Remain.

Only 1/3rd of the electorate voted *for* that, for the change.

Keep telling yourself that those that don't vote, vote for your side -
it's silly enough for you to believe.

Never said that at all.

"2/3rds of the electorate apparently, who didn't answer the poll with Leave"

What I said and have only said is facts.

Keep telling yourself that.

We were in the EU so the *focus* is on doing something else.
So, the poll was asking who would like to do that (or it should have
been, till it was *******ised).
People don't always (bother to) vote for what they already have,
especially if they aren't sure of all the variables.

These are the variables that you were saying above didn't exist because
they weren't voting for change?

The only people who would see it any other way (other than the way it
actually was) are those who don't give a fcuk about doing what 'the
people' wanted and 2/3rds of 'the people' didn't state they wanted
that change (to leave).

2/3rds of the electorate didn't answer the poll with Remain.

In fact, nearly as many who answered the poll
to Leave, specifically answered it to Remain, not bad considering how
people don't vote for what they already have and how many may have
believed the blatant leave lies.

Laughable.

Anyway, you are Rod so I'm out.

I think you've lost touch with reality.


--
Spike

In article , Spike
wrote:
On 23/09/2019 16:38, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article , Spike
wrote:

Those who voted remain or abstained knew exactly what they were
voting for. The status quo.

I can't find a single Remainer who knows what rules, regulation,
directives, and other edicts have been imposed on the UK by the EU
since the second Referendum in 2016, so to say 'they know what they
voted for' is disingenuous at best. You can describe that as 'the
status quo ' if you wish, but it doesn't changed their ignorance.

I take it you then know every single 'edict' which has been 'imposed'
on the UK since 2016, then? If not, you must be ignorant too.

I don't have to, because I'm not the one who said "Those who voted remain
or abstained knew exactly what they were voting for", which is what I was
responding to by asking why the Remain people knew what they were voting
for, when none of them can list anything that has been imposed on the UK
by the EU since the second referendum in June 2106.

The third who voted leave can't even agree among themselves what this
means now. So surely fair to assume many voted on what the leave
campaign promised them? And since so few of those promises seem
attainable in the light of experience, how can you know how they'd
vote now?

What would be 'fair' is to honour the result of the second Referendum.
The EU offered a deal, it was rejected multiple times by Parliament.
The only thing left on the table is a no-deal Brexit.

Oddly, not even Boris is that defeatist. Unless he is lying again too.

So, can *any* Remainer tell us of the rules, regulation, directives, etc,
that have come our way from the EU since June 2016?

The most interesting one was the General Data Protection Regulations. While
these are an EU requirement, the UK was the driving force behind them.

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

On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 15:05:16 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp Esq" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 22 Sep 2019 17:52:43 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 22/09/2019 17:14, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp Esq wrote:
On Sun, 22 Sep 2019 13:22:51 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 22/09/2019 12:37, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp Esq wrote:
On Sun, 22 Sep 2019 06:25:47 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 22/09/2019 02:56, Fredxx wrote:
On 17/09/2019 13:14, TimW wrote:
On 17/09/2019 11:50, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , Andy Burns
writes
harry wrote:

26 Reasons for Leaving the EU.

[snip list]

https://fullfact.org/europe/viral-list-about-lisbon-treaty-wrong

I'll be interested to read our Brexiteers views on the above.


Brexiters don't even care if it's true or not. Just as long as they
can be shouty, angry and win. it's populism, it's nationalism, it's
post-truth politics.

Only a remainer would say something like that.


The irony is that that is exactly what remain is - post truth
politics.

Just as long as they can be shouty, angry and win. it's populism,
it's
nationalism, it's post-truth politics.

Only in this case its the EU representing the national entity.

How many people waving Jacks on the streets? How many waving EU
flags?

Leave DID win.

Really?

I seem to recollect that winning involved a gain of some kind.

Have you not won anything? You poor thing.

I don't gamble. For every winner there are losers. The buzz of a win
does not appease the depression of a loss.

Likewise, where the winnings are less than the money you put in. I think
the National lottery payout is around 30%.

But never taking a gambol is different. We knew you had an abusive
personality, we can now add 'boring'.

I'm an Engineer. I do not take risks.

Corse you do, every time you leave the house.

Another engineering skill, deciding between fact and fantacy

https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/home-and.../introduction/


AB

In article , T i m
writes
On Sun, 22 Sep 2019 04:48:03 +0000 (UTC), Brian Reay
wrote:

snip

We are more worried about you. ;-(

No, you are worried about your selfish views not being listen shared by
others.

Bwhahaha. 'My views' were shared by 2/3rds of the electorate mate.

The result of the Vote wasnt to your liking

More complete and utter BS. You really don't have a clue.

I didn't vote so don't have a dog in this fight.
I didn't vote (even though I spoiled my paper) because it wasn't clear
at the time, just how many things I sensed were lies were actual
lies,. Since then we have learned that it was all of them. £350M/w to
the NHS instead, Turks coming over in hoards ...

and now you are acting like
spoilt brat with his fingers in his ears shouting his demands.

And you are acting (although in your case I don't think it's an act
;0( ) like someone on a campaign for your own selfish reasons.

Fact. 2/3rds of the electorate DID NOT vote FOR leaving the EU.

Because you are a bit slow ... especially for a maths teacher g Only
1/3rd of the electorate voted to leave. Fact.

Now, if you think that all that is a clear demonstration of
*anything*, other than it's far from cut and dried that 'the people'
want us out of the EU, then you are only further demonstrating the
fact you are on a personal campaign and aren't interested in what
might actually be best for 'the people'.

First of all I thought they were simply venal trolls, but I am coming to
reaslise that they are in complete and utter denial: They have swallowed
project fear hook line and sinker, and are really genuinely scared and
in utter denial because they not only believe it, but believe that
politicians will reverse it. Because it is 'wrong'

Correct, but not because we believe in any hype or spin, put out by
the Brexiteers but because we haven't seen anything yet that justifies
the whole clusterfcuk to 'most people'.

Your failure to absorb the available information,

Ah, like your indoctrination you mean?

or more exactly your
refusal,

How can I refuse what hasn't been presented (unless you think that
what you consider to be 'good reasons' would have to apply to
everyone)?

Because you think you are right and because I won't roll over and
agree, you throw your toys out the pram?

Come up with a reasonable level of proof that 'most people' will (not
might or should be) better off out of the EU and then I might vote
Leave.

isnt anyone elses responsibility but your own.

Exactly, something I took on from the beginning when not forced to
vote on something that was far from clear.


Brexit was the answer to the question that few were asking and became
an answer by default, not because it was right or sensible.


Just because you dont like it doesnt make it wrong.

No, of course it doesn't, in the same way because you like it (for
reasons that only fanatic Brexiteers consider reasonable) that doesn't
make it right either.

The difference between us is, I am fully aware I don't have all the
answers but you aren't aware that you don't. You voted on your beliefs
(because NO ONE still has any idea of the final deal / outcome) and I
needed facts. You were able to vote with no real idea of how it might
impact everyone and I wouldn't gamble that against the status quo.

You are a minority activist on a crusade but without the ability to
explain to the majority why we should do what you want.

Cheers, T i m


It's really astonishing that 3 year on and you're still spouting the
same ****. Do you suffer from Aspergers like Greta?
--
bert

On 23/09/2019 22:08, bert wrote:


It's really astonishing that 3 year on and you're still spouting the
same ****. Do you suffer from Aspergers like Greta?

Aren't you still spouting the same sh!t too?

On Sun, 22 Sep 2019 12:37:32 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp Esq
wrote:

snip

I seem to recollect that winning involved a gain of some kind.

Ah, but then you are forgetting 'principals'. You can try to fight the
local council over a 30 pound parking ticket, run up thousands of
pounds in costs. But that doesn't matter as long as you 'win'.

Throwing balls into jars in a firground for instance got you a stuffed
toy.

Or a goldfish in the old days the Brexiteers want to take us back to.

Not a lot of use really but it didn't involve you losing your
rights, losing your right to be represented by parliament on the whim
of a lying unelected dictator.

Quite.

Winning didn't involve losing trade agreements that a considerable
amount of the workforce depended on for jobs.

When the world is burning and countries bristling for fights with each
other and people are dying for the sake of clean water and all we need
to be doing is pi$$ing £1M away every day on some minority interest
crusade.

Leave won nothing. Leave gave away their rights, their democracy and
their credibility in the world.

And they didn't really win either, especially if they only get a
diluted version of what they thought / hoped / guessed / dreamed.

If winning involves only a fraction of the Yellowhammer outcome,
Gamblers anonymous must be entirely populated by winners.

It wouldn't be populated by fanatic Brexiteers, they don't realise
they have a problem of course ...

Cheers, T i m

T i m wrote:

All these holiday migrants, flying to places in the EU (and further),
spending all their money there and polluting the atmosphere in the
process!

For the next fortnight, the 'shadow' planes will be flying out empty and
bringing the holiday-makers back, while many of those unable to fly out
with Thomas Cook will re-book and be outbound on a different flight ...

On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 23:08:17 +0100, Andy Burns
wrote:

T i m wrote:

All these holiday migrants, flying to places in the EU (and further),
spending all their money there and polluting the atmosphere in the
process!

For the next fortnight, the 'shadow' planes will be flying out empty and
bringing the holiday-makers back, while many of those unable to fly out
with Thomas Cook will re-book and be outbound on a different flight ...

Great. ;-(

Hopefully though it will make a few people consider a staycation. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp Esq" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 15:05:16 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp Esq" wrote in
message
. ..
On Sun, 22 Sep 2019 17:52:43 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 22/09/2019 17:14, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp Esq wrote:
On Sun, 22 Sep 2019 13:22:51 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 22/09/2019 12:37, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp Esq wrote:
On Sun, 22 Sep 2019 06:25:47 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 22/09/2019 02:56, Fredxx wrote:
On 17/09/2019 13:14, TimW wrote:
On 17/09/2019 11:50, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , Andy Burns
writes
harry wrote:

26 Reasons for Leaving the EU.

[snip list]

https://fullfact.org/europe/viral-list-about-lisbon-treaty-wrong

I'll be interested to read our Brexiteers views on the above.


Brexiters don't even care if it's true or not. Just as long as
they
can be shouty, angry and win. it's populism, it's nationalism,
it's
post-truth politics.

Only a remainer would say something like that.


The irony is that that is exactly what remain is - post truth
politics.

Just as long as they can be shouty, angry and win. it's populism,
it's
nationalism, it's post-truth politics.

Only in this case its the EU representing the national entity.

How many people waving Jacks on the streets? How many waving EU
flags?

Leave DID win.

Really?

I seem to recollect that winning involved a gain of some kind.

Have you not won anything? You poor thing.

I don't gamble. For every winner there are losers. The buzz of a win
does not appease the depression of a loss.

Likewise, where the winnings are less than the money you put in. I think
the National lottery payout is around 30%.

But never taking a gambol is different. We knew you had an abusive
personality, we can now add 'boring'.

I'm an Engineer. I do not take risks.

Corse you do, every time you leave the house.

Another engineering skill, deciding between fact and fantacy

More mindless silly stuff from you.

https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/home-and.../introduction/

The risk of death by accident is much higher in a car than in your house,
stupid.

On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 22:40:47 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 23/09/2019 22:08, bert wrote:


It's really astonishing that 3 year on and you're still spouting the
same ****. Do you suffer from Aspergers like Greta?

Aren't you still spouting the same sh!t too?

Given that all I was doing was stating fact that is likely to be
confirmed as sense by most reasonable people and the likes of berk
just repeats the same set of lies / hopes / dreams and predictions as
if his (minority) view trumps that of the majority?

If you were to filter out all those people who just tossed a coin and
happened to vote Leave (the only vote that actually made a difference
and put us in this clusterfcuk), those who were plain racists, those
pub philosophers who though they had all the answers and the crystal
ball viewing conspiracy theorists ... and those who voted for the BS
like the '£350M/w to the NHS instead' ... I'm pretty sure leave
wouldn't have 'won' (with only 1/3 of the electorate supporting it as
it was).

And we wouldn't have lost 2 PM's, 3 Brexit secretaries, 10's of MP's,
had to do a deal with MP's on a different landmass to keep the
government in power and be spending millions of taxpayers money on the
PM's questionable moves and dealing with the potential 'damage' to our
country.

I wonder why 3 years on we still know no more re the consequences of
that *******ised poll than we did on the day? ;-(

The answer, Brexit was the answer to a question very few were actually
asking.

Cheers, T i m

On Tue, 24 Sep 2019 08:18:49 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH more of the trolling senile asshole's usual troll****

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 85-year-old trolling senile
cretin from Oz:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/r...d-faq.2973853/

On 23/09/2019 23:12, T i m wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 23:08:17 +0100, Andy Burns
wrote:

T i m wrote:

All these holiday migrants, flying to places in the EU (and further),
spending all their money there and polluting the atmosphere in the
process!

For the next fortnight, the 'shadow' planes will be flying out empty and
bringing the holiday-makers back, while many of those unable to fly out
with Thomas Cook will re-book and be outbound on a different flight ...

Great. ;-(

Hopefully though it will make a few people consider a staycation. ;-)

Cheers, T i m


I hope not, that will put the cost of my holidays up.

On 23/09/2019 22:18, Rod Speed wrote:

The risk of death by accident is much higher in a car than in your house,
stupid.

We are getting to the point where fewer people will be killed on the
road than there are killed by falling down stairs. Admittedly, there are
plenty of stairs outside the home, but pretty soon we will need
legislation to enforce stair safety.


--
Spike

On 23/09/2019 18:04, charles wrote:
In article , Spike

So, can *any* Remainer tell us of the rules, regulation, directives, etc,
that have come our way from the EU since June 2016?

The most interesting one was the General Data Protection Regulations. While
these are an EU requirement, the UK was the driving force behind them.

One down, possibly thousands to go....


--
Spike

In message , Spike
writes
On 23/09/2019 18:04, charles wrote:
In article , Spike

So, can *any* Remainer tell us of the rules, regulation, directives, etc,
that have come our way from the EU since June 2016?

The most interesting one was the General Data Protection Regulations. While
these are an EU requirement, the UK was the driving force behind them.

One down, possibly thousands to go....

By the same token, few Leavers can actually think of (m)any draconian
laws that have ever been 'imposed' on us by the 'EUSSR' - AND that the
UK didn't want, but was forced to accept. [Those who have been listening
to LBC's James o'Brien will know what I mean.]
--
Ian

On 24/09/2019 10:15, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Spike
writes
On 23/09/2019 18:04, charles wrote:
In article , Spike

So, can *any* Remainer tell us of the rules, regulation, directives,
etc,
that have come our way from the EU since June 2016?

The most interesting one was the General Data Protection Regulations.
While
these are an EU requirement, the UK was the driving force behind them.

One down, possibly thousands to go....

By the same token, few Leavers can actually think of (m)any draconian
laws that have ever been 'imposed' on us by the 'EUSSR' - AND that the
UK didn't want, but was forced to accept. [Those who have been listening
to LBC's James o'Brien will know what I mean.]

Climate Change Act
for one.


--
You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a
kind word alone.

Al Capone

On Tue, 24 Sep 2019 08:21:32 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote:

snip

Hopefully though it will make a few people consider a staycation. ;-)


I hope not, that will put the cost of my holidays up.

But that would help our economy and reduce pollution and environmental
noise.

And, given many of the migrant workers are likely to go home, all the
surplus air-travel and ex travel agent workers can get jobs as
cleaners and cooks in our hotels and resorts. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

In article ,
Spike wrote:
I take it you then know every single 'edict' which has been 'imposed'
on the UK since 2016, then? If not, you must be ignorant too.

I don't have to, because I'm not the one who said "Those who voted
remain or abstained knew exactly what they were voting for", which is
what I was responding to by asking why the Remain people knew what they
were voting for, when none of them can list anything that has been
imposed on the UK by the EU since the second referendum in June 2106.

Ah - right. Some of us may not actually care about the curvature of paper
clips or whatever. Leave that to those who make such things to object if
needed.

I hope you similarly keep on top of every single new regulation the UK
parliaments passes - no matter if it concerns you or not.

--
*He who dies with the most toys is, nonetheless, dead.

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

In article ,
Spike wrote:
What ballot paper did you see, then? On mine there was one question on
it, the answers to which were a choice between LEAVE and REMAIN. I
didn't see Anna Logue there anywhere.

Perhaps you'd explain why the leave campaign spent so much time telling us
we'd get a much better deal with the EU once out of it, then? Or by
implication in the lead up to actually leaving? And why they also said we
had no intention of cutting off all ties with the EU?

Odd the way you think every reg the EU passes is of vital importance to
everyone in the EU, while ignoring the larger picture?

--
*What was the best thing before sliced bread? *

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

In article ,
charles wrote:
So, can *any* Remainer tell us of the rules, regulation, directives,
etc, that have come our way from the EU since June 2016?

The most interesting one was the General Data Protection Regulations.
While these are an EU requirement, the UK was the driving force behind
them.

Surely not, Charles? According to so many on here we are merely the
servants of the EU. In no position to enact anything?

--
*You know you're a redneck if your home has wheels and your car doesn't.

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

On 24/09/2019 11:43, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/09/2019 10:15, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Spike
writes
On 23/09/2019 18:04, charles wrote:
In article , Spike

So, can *any* Remainer tell us of the rules, regulation,
directives, etc,
that have come our way from the EU since June 2016?

The most interesting one was the General Data Protection
Regulations. While
these are an EU requirement, the UK was the driving force behind them.

One down, possibly thousands to go....

By the same token, few Leavers can actually think of (m)any draconian
laws that have ever been 'imposed' on us by the 'EUSSR' - AND that the
UK didn't want, but was forced to accept. [Those who have been
listening to LBC's James o'Brien will know what I mean.]

Climate Change Act
for one.



But the UK was one of the countries that supported that.
Or didn't you know?

Much of the climate activists data is from the UK.

In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
charles wrote:
So, can *any* Remainer tell us of the rules, regulation, directives,
etc, that have come our way from the EU since June 2016?

The most interesting one was the General Data Protection Regulations.
While these are an EU requirement, the UK was the driving force behind
them.

Surely not, Charles? According to so many on here we are merely the
servants of the EU. In no position to enact anything?

Serfs not servants, Shirley

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

In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
By the same token, few Leavers can actually think of (m)any draconian
laws that have ever been 'imposed' on us by the 'EUSSR' - AND that the
UK didn't want, but was forced to accept. [Those who have been
listening to LBC's James o'Brien will know what I mean.]

Climate Change Act
for one.



But the UK was one of the countries that supported that.
Or didn't you know?

Much of the climate activists data is from the UK.

I'd guess Turnip wants a body like the EU to save us from ourselves. When
it suits him.

--
*You're never too old to learn something stupid.
Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 24/09/2019 12:58, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Spike wrote:

What ballot paper did you see, then? On mine there was one question on
it, the answers to which were a choice between LEAVE and REMAIN. I
didn't see Anna Logue there anywhere.

Perhaps you'd explain why the leave campaign spent so much time telling us
we'd get a much better deal with the EU once out of it, then?

Was that question on your ballot paper, then? It certainly wasn't on mine.

Or by
implication in the lead up to actually leaving? And why they also said we
had no intention of cutting off all ties with the EU?

Was that question also on your ballot paper, then? It certainly wasn't
on mine.

Odd the way you think every reg the EU passes is of vital importance to
everyone in the EU, while ignoring the larger picture?

Ah, the devastating, incontrovertible, unanswerable 'bigger picture'
(that only 'the right people' see) claim.


--
Spike

In article ,
Spike wrote:
Perhaps you'd explain why the leave campaign spent so much time
telling us we'd get a much better deal with the EU once out of it,
then?

Was that question on your ballot paper, then? It certainly wasn't on
mine.

Are you saying you voted without listening/reading any of the arguments
for and against?

You must be incredibly well informed. Or rather stupid.

--
*Modulation in all things *

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

"Spike" wrote in message
...
On 23/09/2019 22:18, Rod Speed wrote:

The risk of death by accident is much higher in a car than in your house,
stupid.

We are getting to the point where fewer people will be killed on the
road than there are killed by falling down stairs. Admittedly, there are
plenty of stairs outside the home, but pretty soon we will need
legislation to enforce stair safety.

But he still takes risks every time he uses the stairs in his house, blotto
as he always is.