|
|
Post by pg13 on Jan 26, 2019 15:49:07 GMT
I'm of the opinion that it really makes no difference whether we are in or out these days. Elections and referendums only take place to create the illusion that the general public have a say, when in reality, all the important decisions are made by big businesses and corporations and we are merely pawns in their game. Brexit is costing us millions and no-one really wants it. No good will come of it and people will suffer. The reason why we elect officials is because the public can't make decisions as important as this. Do you take the same view with the Scottish Independence Referendum? If not, why not? |
|
|
|
Post by kremlinshadow on Jan 26, 2019 19:18:29 GMT
... well, i thought my * along with *Relax highlighted it was tongue in cheek (like 99% of my posts here) but now that you ask me, I do think Britain is silly for it, because of the non stop shambles and embarrassment it's been since day one. I'm surprised TonyR hasn't picked you up on your anti-brexitism attitudes. You're comments on Brexit and the British make you come across as a right raving racist  |
|
|
|
Post by kremlinshadow on Jan 26, 2019 19:28:58 GMT
Brexit is costing us millions and no-one really wants it. No good will come of it and people will suffer. The reason why we elect officials is because the public can't make decisions as important as this. Do you take the same view with the Scottish Independence Referendum? If not, why not? The irony is it's costing us a whole lot more millions by staying in. And the reason we elect a representative, is to represent the constituency voice in parliament, not to make decisions on our behalf and this is where they have somewhat forgotten their purpose, some can be completely clueless. I totally supported the Scottish referendum and the same should be done with the British people, they were given the choice and they chose out and the arrogance of some to question the voice of 17+ milllion is astounding, talk about bad losers. So that's a great question. |
|
|
|
Post by pg13 on Jan 27, 2019 16:47:31 GMT
Do you take the same view with the Scottish Independence Referendum? If not, why not? The irony is it's costing us a whole lot more millions by staying in. And the reason we elect a representative, is to represent the constituency voice in parliament, not to make decisions on our behalf and this is where they have somewhat forgotten their purpose, some can be completely clueless. I totally supported the Scottish referendum and the same should be done with the British people, they were given the choice and they chose out and the arrogance of some to question the voice of 17+ milllion is astounding, talk about bad losers. So that's a great question. There's a reason I brought up the question of the Scottish independence referendum and that's because if Scotland had voted yes in 2014......Scotland would have been OUT of the UK AND the EU. So, anyone who claims that the British people should never have been asked to decide whether the UK stays in or out of the EU simply because they are too "thick" must surely hold the exact same view for the Scottish independence referendum before it! And if not, why not? Some say that Brexit should not be going ahead because of the margin being very small. 52% v 48%. Again, if that argument held any water, then Wales would never have had devolution. Here's the results of that: The 1992 Swiss referendum regarding the EU had a similar close result in favour of no. For both of these two referendums, there was no large scale protests attempting to claim that the results should not stand because they were too tight. So, why was it claimed in regards to Brexit? Smacks of desperation. As for the issue of lies, alleged or otherwise, during the UK EU Referendum in 2016, again the 2014 Scottish Independence Referendum had quite a lot of lies being peddled to the people of Scotland by the SNP. So much so that the SNP's Mhari Black later admitted to telling her constituents to ignore the SNP white paper Scotland's Future. She told them it was fiction which it was. Yet there was no large scale protests other like with Brexit. It's one thing to disagree with Brexit and quite another to use various claims to demand it should be blocked such as: Result too close Oh, look a squirrel! The Northern Ireland peace process is at risk! A hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland could create violence! What's the question? Ahh...the answer is to block Brexit! I should state that the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland did not even ignite violence in Northern Ireland in 1969 in the first place. So, why would it in 2019? Those who aren't well versed in the history of Operation Banner aka The Troubles would claim this. As would Republicans such as Sinn Fein, not to mention the Remainers plus the Republic of Ireland Government. It's much easier to paint such a picture of an erroneous cause and effect situation like this one to create an emotional reaction. Unfortunately, it's that kind of rhetoric about the border leading to violence that polarises people. Especially in Northern Ireland where the Belfast Agreement aka the Good Friday Agreement has led to the polarising of the people. What, didn't realise that the Agreement encourages sectarianism, aye?! |
|
|
|
Post by kremlinshadow on Jan 27, 2019 17:45:51 GMT
The irony is it's costing us a whole lot more millions by staying in. And the reason we elect a representative, is to represent the constituency voice in parliament, not to make decisions on our behalf and this is where they have somewhat forgotten their purpose, some can be completely clueless. I totally supported the Scottish referendum and the same should be done with the British people, they were given the choice and they chose out and the arrogance of some to question the voice of 17+ milllion is astounding, talk about bad losers. So that's a great question. There's a reason I brought up the question of the Scottish independence referendum and that's because if Scotland had voted yes in 2014......Scotland would have been OUT of the UK AND the EU. So, anyone who claims that the British people should never have been asked to decide whether the UK stays in or out of the EU simply because they are too "thick" must surely hold the exact same view for the Scottish independence referendum before it! And if not, why not? Some say that Brexit should not be going ahead because of the margin being very small. 52% v 48%. Again, if that argument held any water, then Wales would never have had devolution. Here's the results of that: The 1992 Swiss referendum regarding the EU had a similar close result in favour of no. For both of these two referendums, there was no large scale protests attempting to claim that the results should not stand because they were too tight. So, why was it claimed in regards to Brexit? Smacks of desperation. As for the issue of lies, alleged or otherwise, during the UK EU Referendum in 2016, again the 2014 Scottish Independence Referendum had quite a lot of lies being peddled to the people of Scotland by the SNP. So much so that the SNP's Mhari Black later admitted to telling her constituents to ignore the SNP white paper Scotland's Future. She told them it was fiction which it was. Yet there was no large scale protests other like with Brexit. It's one thing to disagree with Brexit and quite another to use various claims to demand it should be blocked such as: Result too close Oh, look a squirrel! The Northern Ireland peace process is at risk! A hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland could create violence! What's the question? Ahh...the answer is to block Brexit! I should state that the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland did not even ignite violence in Northern Ireland in 1969 in the first place. So, why would it in 2019? Those who aren't well versed in the history of Operation Banner aka The Troubles would claim this. As would Republicans such as Sinn Fein, not to mention the Remainers plus the Republic of Ireland Government. It's much easier to paint such a picture of an erroneous cause and effect situation like this one to create an emotional reaction. Unfortunately, it's that kind of rhetoric about the border leading to violence that polarises people. Especially in Northern Ireland where the Belfast Agreement aka the Good Friday Agreement has led to the polarising of the people. What, didn't realise that the Agreement encourages sectarianism, aye?! What it all comes down to is a simple case of bad losers. Libtards like to give the impression that they are open minded and for the people when in fact they are the same as everyone else, for themselves, and lost. But then again we're all racists as well aren't we, for wanting to protect our country. |
|
|
|
Post by pg13 on Jan 27, 2019 18:06:00 GMT
There's a reason I brought up the question of the Scottish independence referendum and that's because if Scotland had voted yes in 2014......Scotland would have been OUT of the UK AND the EU. So, anyone who claims that the British people should never have been asked to decide whether the UK stays in or out of the EU simply because they are too "thick" must surely hold the exact same view for the Scottish independence referendum before it! And if not, why not? Some say that Brexit should not be going ahead because of the margin being very small. 52% v 48%. Again, if that argument held any water, then Wales would never have had devolution. Here's the results of that: The 1992 Swiss referendum regarding the EU had a similar close result in favour of no. For both of these two referendums, there was no large scale protests attempting to claim that the results should not stand because they were too tight. So, why was it claimed in regards to Brexit? Smacks of desperation. As for the issue of lies, alleged or otherwise, during the UK EU Referendum in 2016, again the 2014 Scottish Independence Referendum had quite a lot of lies being peddled to the people of Scotland by the SNP. So much so that the SNP's Mhari Black later admitted to telling her constituents to ignore the SNP white paper Scotland's Future. She told them it was fiction which it was. Yet there was no large scale protests other like with Brexit. It's one thing to disagree with Brexit and quite another to use various claims to demand it should be blocked such as: Result too close Oh, look a squirrel! The Northern Ireland peace process is at risk! A hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland could create violence! What's the question? Ahh...the answer is to block Brexit! I should state that the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland did not even ignite violence in Northern Ireland in 1969 in the first place. So, why would it in 2019? Those who aren't well versed in the history of Operation Banner aka The Troubles would claim this. As would Republicans such as Sinn Fein, not to mention the Remainers plus the Republic of Ireland Government. It's much easier to paint such a picture of an erroneous cause and effect situation like this one to create an emotional reaction. Unfortunately, it's that kind of rhetoric about the border leading to violence that polarises people. Especially in Northern Ireland where the Belfast Agreement aka the Good Friday Agreement has led to the polarising of the people. What, didn't realise that the Agreement encourages sectarianism, aye?! What it all comes down to is a simple case of bad losers. Libtards like to give the impression that they are open minded and for the people when in fact they are the same as everyone else, for themselves, and lost. But then again we're all racists as well aren't we, for wanting to protect our country. Then, there's the fact that the MPs in Parliament voted to give the British public the right to decide on the EU issue. Our own elected officials couldn't decide it themselves! It's a flawed argument for anyone to claim that the elected officials are the ones who should make such major decisions. Look at Diane Abbot and how incoherent she sounded over how many police would be needed and the funding to provide them, for starters. Hell, other countries hold referendums precisely because their elected officials felt it was too big for just them to decide alone. Except for the Federal Republic of Germany which does not permit any referenda. |
|
|
|
Post by pg13 on Apr 9, 2019 23:44:01 GMT
It disgusts me when I see and hear about people trying to use Northern Ireland as a weapon in this whole thing for their own ends.
Notice how people trot out whatever tripe suits them without once being able to quote from the Belfast Agreement aka the Good Friday Agreement?
It's a big clue to the shite they spout.
The EU and Republic of Ireland have also been consistent offenders in this regard for obvious personal political reasons.
And the facts be damned.
|
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on May 24, 2019 11:28:14 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by MattyJam on May 24, 2019 11:36:06 GMT
If Boris Johnson becomes PM it'll be like the UK equivalent of Donald Trump becoming President. |
|
|
|
Post by pg13 on May 26, 2019 13:22:31 GMT
This demonstrates that for both the EU and for Great Britain Remainers (who are mostly themselves quite ignorant of the complexities of Northern Ireland) Ulster was nothing more than a political pawn.
Just a weapon to try to punish the UK for the Leave result.
Once more, I repeat that ZERO threat of political violence by Sad Act and Noo Oi R Arrgghh is in any way justifiable.
So, why has the EU and GB Remainers implied there's justification for it by not only constantly talking about it, but in kowtowing to such threats, implied or explicit?
That's even worse.
Answers on a postcard! 🤣
|
|
|
|
Post by pg13 on Jun 4, 2019 16:59:13 GMT
I voted for Britain to leave the EU, but have a nagging feeling all these political delay tactics and posturing is merely a way of the government biding their time until the whole thing collapses. Many of the elite in power did not want Brexit and will use everything in their power to stop it happening, despite it being what the British people voted for. I suspect Trumps recent attempts at undermining Theresa May's softly soft approach is probably music to the ears of hardline Remain politicians. Still holds up. Once again, Barnier repeats his comments about the British living in the past. And yammers on about how the Troubles might be reignited. Basically, a scare tactic. m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/brexit/hard-border-could-trigger-a-return-to-violence-in-northern-ireland-fears-barnier-38165089.htmlLet me explain: 1) there is no justification for terrorism. If it happens, then fight it head on and do not give them OTRs or Royal Prerogative of Mercy Pardons. 2) the Backstop which Barnier said is Theresa May's proposal is a breach of the Good Friday Agreement. The EU and the ROI say there can be no breach of the GFA, but it seems this is OK. Hypocrites. 3) the backstop nonsense is NOT the only way to resolve the issue. Giving the Republic of Ireland special status is the best option all round as it preserves NI-ROI trade/movement, GB-ROI trade/movement and absolutely does NOT breach the GFA in any way. So what if ROI goods would face checks into the EU? The EU and Republic of Ireland keep telling us that the greater good is more important here. Let's see it. Of course, the EU has only ever been interested in making Brexit extremely difficult. They do not want to help us or encourage Euroscepticism in the EU. Basically, EU act in bad faith and like to use people's fears for their own ends. Otherwise, they'd sort this by giving the Republic of Ireland special status. Simples. |
|
|
|
Post by Vega on Jun 5, 2019 2:01:46 GMT
I'm hardly an expert, but it seems to me that basing a political decision over whether or not terrorists will decide to jinn up conflict is bizarre. The U.S. doesn't base its foreign policy decisions over whether or not ISIS will retaliate. Why should the UK worry about what the IRA does?
|
|
|
|
Post by pg13 on Jun 5, 2019 15:16:39 GMT
I'm hardly an expert, but it seems to me that basing a political decision over whether or not terrorists will decide to jinn up conflict is bizarre. The U.S. doesn't base its foreign policy decisions over whether or not ISIS will retaliate. Why should the UK worry about what the IRA does? Exactly. The irony is that the part of the UK that is least fearful and most sceptical of any return to terrorist violence is....Northern Ireland's people. It is those in Great Britain and the EU as well as the Republic of Ireland who are talking up the potential of political terrorism in Ulster. Of course, it's Remainers in Great Britain who are trying to use Northern Ireland in a cynical manner in order to stop Brexit. It is Remainers who have been spreading some nonsense about Northern Ireland, its people and even some of its political parties. They make out they know about Ulster, but when I challenge them to find the specific part of the Good Friday Agreement which prohibits a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland....well, they go quiet. They splutter. And the Good Friday Agreement is actually called the Belfast Agreement. This though is what you get when you listen to the MSM too much and are driven by personal bias. Likewise, the Republic of Ireland along with Varadkar and Coveney are also cynically misusing Northern Ireland for their own ends. The same applies to the EU. This is exactly the kind of behaviour that turned me from a reluctant Remainer to a "Let's leave now!" voter. I do not agree with anyone using my people (UK) or, more specifically, Ulster as a pawn in their political games. Contrast my posts on this issue with Tony R's. I grew up and lived during Operation Banner aka the Troubles. Several of my relatives were in the Security Forces and PIRA chased out family car intending to murder my father, mother, sister and myself - they failed. I was around 9 years old and this was two months after PIRA murdered my uncle doing the school run. Notice how I'm not worried about any potential for conflict? Most people in Northern Ireland believe that the Troubles will not return. It's those who never lived during those days and who do not really understand Northern Ireland who seem scared out of their wits. They believe for one reason or another that violence will resume. Obviously, they do not understand or know how the Security Forces defeated Sinn Fein and the IRA in the first place. That's twice now we've defeated Republican terrorists trying to destroy Northern Ireland for a united Ireland shite. Twice. I can't see them trying to go for a third time. They'll be beaten even more soundly because the Security Forces have evolved to counter the insurgent threat from Al Quaida and ISIS. Ironically, Al Quaida and ISIS learnt from PIRA themselves. Then improved on PIRA's terrorism. Still, only PIRA has a 100% record in executing everyone they caught. ISIS don't. Bottom line is the Security Forces are ready. British Special Ops teams have been infiltrating RIRA who became NIRA since 2012 when they tried working with ISIS on improving PIRA's prig. The terrorists are still doing the same old things in contrast. We're ready. It'll be fine even if Republicans try their luck. If anyone believes in democracy and the rule of law, how can they be too scared to stand up against terrorism?
How can you claim to be for democracy and the rule of law if you're terrified of upsetting the delicate terrorist darlings?
You can't. It's one or the other. |
|
|
|
Post by pg13 on Jun 7, 2019 14:39:43 GMT
Thrown out as predicted.
No sympathy for the businessman who brought the lawsuit.
|
|
|
|
Post by pg13 on Jun 9, 2019 12:47:21 GMT
I don't think it's obvious that Leave was the wrong decision at all. There is a major problem in this country when it comes to immigration and the left must admit that there is extreme leftism. Forcing an ideology (multiculturalism) on people with threats of being racist, misogynistic bigots if you don't agree, is facism.No, it isn't: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FascismThat's just one possible meaning of the term fascist. Ghost meant this particular one below: Fits a lot of the Remainers in the UK who do what Ghost described as well as misusing the Northern Ireland peace process itself for their own ends. |
|
