OFFICIAL Brexit Thread

[Sawtooth the Beaver]

You might one day realise for all the supposed crap ness of the UK in relative terms it’s bloody successful.

I am fully aware of this and have always been.

You might one day realise for all the supposed crap ness of the EU in relative terms it’s bloody successful, as has been our membership.

[bimboman]

You might one day realise for all the supposed crap ness of the UK in relative terms it’s bloody successful.

I am fully aware of this and have always been.

You might one day realise for all the supposed crap ness of the EU in relative terms it’s bloody successful, as has been our membership.

The EU is a bit Meh at best and life destroying in some countries at worst.

It’s very bad for some .

[terryfinch]

You might one day realise for all the supposed crap ness of the UK in relative terms it’s bloody successful.

I am fully aware of this and have always been.

You might one day realise for all the supposed crap ness of the EU in relative terms it’s bloody successful, as has been our membership.

The EU is a bit Meh at best and life destroying in some countries at worst.

It’s very bad for some .

This is true. Driving through France and Italy is now heart breaking.

[Newsome]

The bimbot school of debate:

Don't admit you are wrong.
Don't make concessions.
Expect others to understand your position but don't give them the same benefit.

[Sawtooth the Beaver]

by bimboman » 26 Oct 2020 11:42

Sawtooth the Beaver wrote: ↑26 Oct 2020 11:38
You might one day realise for all the supposed crap ness of the UK in relative terms it’s bloody successful.
I am fully aware of this and have always been.

You might one day realise for all the supposed crap ness of the EU in relative terms it’s bloody successful, as has been our membership.

The EU is a bit Meh at best and life destroying in some countries at worst.

It’s very bad for some .

Some

Go on, just admit it: Been great for the UK or at least nail your colours to the wall and admit you voted remain even though you thought membership had been bad for the UK

[bimboman]

The bimbot school of debate:

Don't admit you are wrong.
Don't make concessions.
Expect others to understand your position but don't give them the same benefit.

Well I’m offering an opinion, why would I admit that is wrong when I clearly don’t as it’s my opinion.

I don’t care what others do, there’s no expectation.

[bimboman]

by bimboman » 26 Oct 2020 11:42

Sawtooth the Beaver wrote: ↑26 Oct 2020 11:38
You might one day realise for all the supposed crap ness of the UK in relative terms it’s bloody successful.
I am fully aware of this and have always been.

You might one day realise for all the supposed crap ness of the EU in relative terms it’s bloody successful, as has been our membership.

The EU is a bit Meh at best and life destroying in some countries at worst.

It’s very bad for some .

Some

Go on, just admit it: Been great for the UK or at least nail your colours to the wall and admit you voted remain even though you thought membership had been bad for the UK

I voted remain because I didn’t think leaving was worth the kuffule.... that’s probably been borne out.

Very few who voted remain like the EU though. The EU either has to become the Utd states of Europe or fail.

[Sawtooth the Beaver]

Should go into politics

Do you consider the UK to be in your summarization of "some"?

[bimboman]

Should go into politics

Do you consider the UK to be in your summarization of "some"?

I think at best it was neutral, at worst again the two speed Europe is always going to be an issue. 3 the actions of German dominance of the whole thing is bad.

This could have all been solved if Major, Blair and Brown had been honest regarding the big treaty changes.

[Sawtooth the Beaver]

This could have all been solved if Major, Blair and Brown had been honest regarding the big treaty changes.

A more honest and comprehensive debate and engagement with the UK public would have gone a long way, also more analysis of the reforms Cameron got pre 2016.

But that presupposes that there would have been honesty from our rabidly anti-EU press factions also.

[bimboman]

This could have all been solved if Major, Blair and Brown had been honest regarding the big treaty changes.

A more honest and comprehensive debate and engagement with the UK public would have gone a long way, also more analysis of the reforms Cameron got pre 2106.

But that presupposes that there would have been honesty from our rabidly anti-EU press factions also.

A vote on the enormous transfer of powers and honesty about them.

[Sawtooth the Beaver]

But that presupposes that there would have been honesty from our rabidly anti-EU press factions also.

As we saw in 2016 honest debate when it came to voting was the last thing we got.

[ovalball]

I'll just leave this here !!

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/ ... nt-Decline

[redderneck]

I'll just leave this here !!

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/ ... nt-Decline

Oh Sweet Jesus, don't encourage Morkeshing twunts. They have more than enough to keep themselves busy pitching campaigns to companies without having the cnuts looking to tap into taxpayers pockets by pitching nuanced nationalism to politicians.

[merry!]

I'll just leave this here !!

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/ ... nt-Decline

i don't usually have time time for polls (pre-election ones, anyway), but that one seems about right.

[Zico]

Chipstakes and Messenger have Fox News standard stats to share..anytime now

[mdaclarke]

Any campaign to Rejoin is doomed if it doesn;t deal with the issue of foreign criminals taking advantage of FoM to commit crime.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... rfume.html

Maybe a small minority but any rejoin campaign can't pretend that they don't exist. Unless rejoiners have a solution any campaign to rejoin is doomed.

[Zico]

Any campaign to Rejoin is doomed if it doesn;t deal with the issue of foreign criminals taking advantage of FoM to commit crime.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... rfume.html

Maybe a small minority but any rejoin campaign can't pretend that they don't exist. Unless rejoiners have a solution any campaign to rejoin is doomed.

Daily Mail?

[mdaclarke]

Any campaign to Rejoin is doomed if it doesn;t deal with the issue of foreign criminals taking advantage of FoM to commit crime.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... rfume.html

Maybe a small minority but any rejoin campaign can't pretend that they don't exist. Unless rejoiners have a solution any campaign to rejoin is doomed.

Daily Mail?

Doesn't make it not true though.

[paddyor]

https://twitter.com/DavidHenigUK/status ... 32649?s=20

[mabunch78]

I'll just leave this here !!

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/ ... nt-Decline

Sweden ahead of NZ in governance. Ouch!

[MrJonno]

Any campaign to Rejoin is doomed if it doesn;t deal with the issue of foreign criminals taking advantage of FoM to commit crime.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... rfume.html

Maybe a small minority but any rejoin campaign can't pretend that they don't exist. Unless rejoiners have a solution any campaign to rejoin is doomed.

Daily Mail?

Doesn't make it not true though.

Being the daily mail doesn't make it true but the truth of the matter is the UK has always had the right, under EU rules, to stop criminals entering, it just choose not to use it.

And it was also the UK that insisted on more relaxed rules than other countries wanted.

Or course you've had access to that info all along and either choose not to believe it or are deliberately lying. Either way you are being dishonest

[Sawtooth the Beaver]

[mdaclarke]

Any campaign to Rejoin is doomed if it doesn;t deal with the issue of foreign criminals taking advantage of FoM to commit crime.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... rfume.html

Maybe a small minority but any rejoin campaign can't pretend that they don't exist. Unless rejoiners have a solution any campaign to rejoin is doomed.

Daily Mail?

Doesn't make it not true though.

Being the daily mail doesn't make it true but the truth of the matter is the UK has always had the right, under EU rules, to stop criminals entering, it just choose not to use it.

And it was also the UK that insisted on more relaxed rules than other countries wanted.

Or course you've had access to that info all along and either choose not to believe it or are deliberately lying. Either way you are being dishonest

Your post is a classic example of why Remainers keep losing, dismissing true stories a just because you don't like them and then accusing me of lying or being dishonest

What part of the daily mail story was incorrect?

I won't lower myself to your level. However as the expert on EU rules you will know that only serious criminals can currently be banned. This would not include the Romanian Shoplifting gangs. That annoys so many ordinary people.

If this is your response to reports such as this then I thank my lucky stars that people of the calibre of yourself are remainers/rejoiners as with you on their side Britain will never ever ever ever rejoin the EU.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/home ... 20the%20UK.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/re ... ave-claims

"Question: The Vote Leave campaign has published a dossier of 50 dangerous citizens from EU states, including murderers and rapists, who have been allowed into Britain. It says this is evidence that the UK is “unable to prevent dangerous individuals from walking into the country” while it remains in the trade bloc. Is there any truth in this?

Answer: It is simply not the case that, as Nigel Farage has claimed, “we can’t stop people like this entering the country”. The EU’s 2004 citizenship directive makes it clear that the free movement of people within the EU is not an unqualified right and can be restricted on grounds of “public policy, public security or public health”. This means that serious offenders can be denied entry and the right to live in Britain.

However, the directive does say “previous criminal convictions shall not in themselves constitute grounds for taking such measures”, but adds that convicted criminals can be excluded on a case-by-case basis if they present “a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society”.


Q: So if convicted criminals are not automatically excluded, aren’t the leave campaigners right to say that murderers and rapists will be allowed in?

A: No. As Steve Peers, a professor of EU law at Essex University, has pointed out, they could be refused entry and it is hard to imagine any British judge or the European court of justice overturning that decision in cases involving such serious crimes. As the former Conservative immigration and policing minister Damian Green has said, nearly 6,000 European Economic Area nationals have been prevented from entering Britain since 2010."

[Sawtooth the Beaver]

https://fullfact.org/europe/explaining- ... mmigrants/

[mdaclarke]

https://fullfact.org/europe/explaining- ... mmigrants/

Wouldn't apply in this case

"First, the deal allows host countries to keep out or deport people whose behaviour is “likely (as opposed to “does”) to represent a genuine and serious threat to public policy or security”."

"These changes don’t deliver on the Prime Minister’s previous proposals for “tougher and longer” re-entry bans for foreign rough sleepers, beggars and fraudsters. But they do qualify as “stronger powers to deport criminals and stop them coming back”."

Rejoining the EU will mean allowing low level criminals from the EU back into the UK. (Once we have regained control after the transition period)

Maybe a price worth paying for EU membership but you can't pretend it isn't a price that will have to be paid.

[La soule]

I don't really see what your problem is.

Are there no British criminals living in the EU?

The UK have no criminals at all or if they have, they never travel to the EU?

[Sawtooth the Beaver]

Maybe a price worth paying for EU membership but you can't pretend it isn't a price that will have to be paid.

I am under no illusion that the conditions of re-joining would not be as favourable as those we had (and even less so than those we would have had) should we have stayed.

You can conclude that is a Brexit victory if you like.

[message #2527204]

I don't really see what your problem is.

Are there no British criminals living in the EU?

The UK have no criminals at all or if they have, they never travel to the EU?

All in Spain or the Algarve - they only come home to top up the finances,

[mdaclarke]

I don't really see what your problem is.

Are there no British criminals living in the EU?

The UK have no criminals at all or if they have, they never travel to the EU?

Whataboutery

So because there are British criminals live in the EU it's ok that EU criminals go to the Uk?

As I said part of the price of EU membership is allowing foreign criminals (except for the most serious) into the UK.

The rejoin campaign better have a good answer to why this price is worth paying.

Ultimately the answer is that the financial benefit outweighs the cost of the offences carried out. That answer may make sense from a financial point of view, it is hard to make from an emotional point of view.

[sorCrer]

https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1 ... 6358642689

[bimboman]

https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1 ... 6358642689

Firstly “Femi”


Secondly almost everything the economist says hasn’t happened and won’t happen. That was 2018 when they were still talking about decimation of the city, so far 5,000 jobs have gone and over 1,000 new European based firms have opened in London.

[La soule]

I don't really see what your problem is.

Are there no British criminals living in the EU?

The UK have no criminals at all or if they have, they never travel to the EU?

Whataboutery

So because there are British criminals live in the EU it's ok that EU criminals go to the Uk?

As I said part of the price of EU membership is allowing foreign criminals (except for the most serious) into the UK.

The rejoin campaign better have a good answer to why this price is worth paying.

Ultimately the answer is that the financial benefit outweighs the cost of the offences carried out. That answer may make sense from a financial point of view, it is hard to make from an emotional point of view.

That point just doesn't make sense.

It is about cake again.

[mdaclarke]

I don't really see what your problem is.

Are there no British criminals living in the EU?

The UK have no criminals at all or if they have, they never travel to the EU?

Whataboutery

So because there are British criminals live in the EU it's ok that EU criminals go to the Uk?

As I said part of the price of EU membership is allowing foreign criminals (except for the most serious) into the UK.

The rejoin campaign better have a good answer to why this price is worth paying.

Ultimately the answer is that the financial benefit outweighs the cost of the offences carried out. That answer may make sense from a financial point of view, it is hard to make from an emotional point of view.

That point just doesn't make sense.

It is about cake again.

It makes perfect sense. Whether you choose to understand it is irrelevant. If you can't see how Romanian shoplifting gangs taking advantage of the FoM to enter the country and commit industrial scale shoplifting is relevant to the Brexit/Rejoin debate then that is your/remain/rejoin's problem.

British criminals in the EU are irrelevant when it comes to Brexit and Rejoin as the voters who will have to decide are the British Electorate and they only care about foreign criminals in the UK. They couldn't give a stuff about criminals (British or otherwise) abroad.

Please continue as you have been as it is working dividends with the electorate.

[YOYO]

https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1 ... 6358642689

Firstly “Femi”


Secondly almost everything the economist says hasn’t happened and won’t happen. That was 2018 when they were still talking about decimation of the city, so far 5,000 jobs have gone and over 1,000 new European based firms have opened in London.

7,500.

[Leinster in London]

https://fullfact.org/europe/explaining- ... mmigrants/

Wouldn't apply in this case

"First, the deal allows host countries to keep out or deport people whose behaviour is “likely (as opposed to “does”) to represent a genuine and serious threat to public policy or security”."

"These changes don’t deliver on the Prime Minister’s previous proposals for “tougher and longer” re-entry bans for foreign rough sleepers, beggars and fraudsters. But they do qualify as “stronger powers to deport criminals and stop them coming back”."

Rejoining the EU will mean allowing low level criminals from the EU back into the UK. (Once we have regained control after the transition period)

Maybe a price worth paying for EU membership but you can't pretend it isn't a price that will have to be paid.

You know, Fish are migrants too, and sleep wherever the fúck they want.

[shereblue]

I don't really see what your problem is.

Are there no British criminals living in the EU?

The UK have no criminals at all or if they have, they never travel to the EU?

Whataboutery

So because there are British criminals live in the EU it's ok that EU criminals go to the Uk?

As I said part of the price of EU membership is allowing foreign criminals (except for the most serious) into the UK.

The rejoin campaign better have a good answer to why this price is worth paying.

Ultimately the answer is that the financial benefit outweighs the cost of the offences carried out. That answer may make sense from a financial point of view, it is hard to make from an emotional point of view.

That point just doesn't make sense.

It is about cake again.

It makes perfect sense. Whether you choose to understand it is irrelevant. If you can't see how Romanian shoplifting gangs taking advantage of the FoM to enter the country and commit industrial scale shoplifting is relevant to the Brexit/Rejoin debate then that is your/remain/rejoin's problem.

Please continue as you have been as it is working dividends with the electorate.

Slash police numbers and blame rising crime on foreign criminals. What's not to like? Works every time on thick xenophobes.

[merry!]

british crims retire to the sun with their ill gotten gains. if only eurocrims returned the favour and arrived here loaded with dosh.

just another example of how we've been subsidising the continent.

[iarmhiman]

british crims retire to the sun with their ill gotten gains. if only eurocrims returned the favour and arrived here loaded with dosh.

just another example of how we've been subsidising the continent.

Become a nicer country then.

[merry!]

british crims retire to the sun with their ill gotten gains. if only eurocrims returned the favour and arrived here loaded with dosh.

just another example of how we've been subsidising the continent.

Become a nicer country then.

can't buy sunshine.

doesn't stop them queuing up to get in though does it ( more deaths in the channel today as refugees desperately flee the eu).