Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Fuzzar

OT - EU straw poll...

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

Yes, it is their problem and I would far rathter vote for someone else - but the political party I could genuinely want to vote for does not exist at present.  Maybe the Greens.

Well that's one thing we almost agree on - I would vote Green without hesitation.

Not that I'm suggesting that provides us with a way out of this unholy mess but it does make it seem even stranger that you continue to advocate backing an atrocious deal negotiated by an atrocious Prime Minister, whilst suggesting that all other alternatives are worse - they are not, and I see little sign that the HoC, useless as it is, is going to allow itself to be blackmailed in the way that you suggest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

Yes, it is their problem and I would far rathter vote for someone else - but the political party I could genuinely want to vote for does not exist at present.  Maybe the Greens.

I'm thinking of starting a party called PREMIC (party for the reduction of misery & the increase of contentment). It will have no ideology beyond those in the name & it's interests would be global. It's probably impossible, but I intend to give it some serious thought.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bill said:

Poor hand crank

Having only recently recovered from his confused guff about 'composite motions' we are now told how a future referendum might be spelt out

"Two questions, first question leave or stay, second question if leave Mays deal ( in whatever its final form is ) or no deal."

Which goes against a previous clueless pronouncement from the crank of a hand

" resultant divisiveness of the referendum I would imagine the concept has been consigned to the bin. "

So on one hand(crank) a referendum is consigned to the bin, but on the other it is not - and has the good fortune to have our Swindon Canary stand in tell us how it could be conducted. 😟

I was suggesting how the questions for a referendum could be put, not advocating one. 

You really need to understand that this forum is for discussion,  you seem to have diffuculty with that concept preferring to try and shout down the views of others and constantly misrepresent them.

Everyone can see what you are doing and it adds nothing to the debate.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Van wink said:

I was suggesting how the questions for a referendum could be put, not advocating one. 

You really need to understand that this forum is for discussion,  you seem to have diffuculty with that concept preferring to try and shout down the views of others and constantly misrepresent them.

Everyone can see what you are doing and it adds nothing to the debate.

 

I doubt the irony of that will escape most on here - words coming from someone who not only uses other login ins, regularly replies with four letter words and has constantly avoided dealing with uncomfortable flaws in his argument by accusing me of either living in France and/or being an alcoholic. Perhaps you could remind the good folk on here why you stopped with the libelous accusation that I stole money from the British Legion.

There is no shouting down as this is merely 'type', likewise there is no misrepresentation as you have been quoted, and not out of context. What this particular comment does 'add to the debate' is to once again highlighting that you do not have a clue (composite motion), and have merely posted up what you think will mask that fact.

As to the thought of advocating a referendum that is actually you doing the spinning (yet again0 as your post of March was not about advocating , it was about a prediction - that had it been proven would no doubt been gloated on here endlessly.

But there have been so many predictions from you that eventually one must be right (stopped clock..etc).

However as you were not advocating anything in your first post, then it is pointless to talk about you not advocating anything this time. So if you are to spout off on here do check you know what you are talking about.

As I'm sure ithat would be a welcome change for us all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ron obvious said:

The decision was arguably more democratic than a GE, given the turn out.

 

@ron obvious what is your argument that the referendum was more democratic than a GE?  

It was badly framed, uncompliant with the unwritten UK constituition, and presented to an ill-informed electorate. Massive amounts of mendacious misinformation was added and dubiously funded, illegally it appears in the case of one of campaigns. There appears to have been widespread foreign interference with both sides calling foul.

As a result the decision was carried on 37% of the electorate. Furthermore, there continues to be massive debate on the side of the victors on what Leave even means. This frequently involves reinterpreting their previous statements and in many cases outright lies. Those responsible for the campaign are not responsible for the delivery of the result and vice versa.

As result the outcome has been massively divisive for the country. These divisions are unlikely to be healed within a generation and are more likely to get worse rather than better over the coming years. There is now a very real danger that this will result in the end/break up of the UK.

As a democratic exercise the referendum can be considered as an exemplar of failure. Democracy requires the consent of those defeated, but also respect for the rights of the defeated. It should respect the law, the judicary and also the checks and balances that control power and prevent it from being absolute. Because of reasons above none of that is currently evident.

Edited by BigFish
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Bill said:

I doubt the irony of that will escape most on here - words coming from someone who not only uses other login ins, regularly replies with four letter words and has constantly avoided dealing with uncomfortable flaws in his argument by accusing me of either living in France and/or being an alcoholic. Perhaps you could remind the good folk on here why you stopped with the libelous accusation that I stole money from the British Legion.

There is no shouting down as this is merely 'type', likewise there is no misrepresentation as you have been quoted, and not out of context. What this particular comment does 'add to the debate' is to once again highlighting that you do not have a clue (composite motion), and have merely posted up what you think will mask that fact.

As to the thought of advocating a referendum that is actually you doing the spinning (yet again0 as your post of March was not about advocating , it was about a prediction - that had it been proven would no doubt been gloated on here endlessly.

But there have been so many predictions from you that eventually one must be right (stopped clock..etc).

However as you were not advocating anything in your first post, then it is pointless to talk about you not advocating anything this time. So if you are to spout off on here do check you know what you are talking about.

As I'm sure ithat would be a welcome change for us all.

you really are away with the fairies....😁

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MooreMarriot said:

Airbus’s Senior UK Vice President Katherine Bennett let slip a key nugget of information live on Sky News this afternoon as part of their anti-No Deal media blitz. When challenged over whether “the government put you up to this,” after initially deflecting the question, Bennett confirmed that the Government had indeed asked them to up the ante on Project Fear:

“They did say could you make sure that you make clear the potential impact of a No Deal, and we are happy to do that because No Deal is potentially going to be catastrophic for us.”

Well, that settles that then…

Edited by Jools

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The EU’s long-running duplicity over the Irish border has finally come to a head this week with the Commission wrapping itself up in knots trying to maintain its spurious position on the backstop after Commission Spokesman Margaritas Schinas caused a major fuss on Tuesday by saying that the EU would force Ireland to erect a hard border in the event of no deal. Not going to happen.

Michel Barnier then let the cat out of the bag yesterday while trying to reverse the diplomatic damage, admitting that in the event of no deal “we will have to find an operational way of carrying out checks and controls without putting back in place a border”, going on to say that “my team have worked hard to study how controls can be made paperless or decentralised, which will be useful in all circumstances.” Thus blowing apart the entire fiction that the backstop is necessary to avoid a hard border…

The Telegraph’s James Crisp grilled Schinas on this very point today, who ended up so flustered by the question that he eventually snapped back: “write what you like”. The sham of needing the backstop to avoid a hard border is finally starting to unravel in Brussels. Time the sycophantic British media and political establishment woke up too…

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want hard Brexit you will have to have a hard border in Ireland. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Herman said:

If you want hard Brexit you will have to have a hard border in Ireland. 

Corbyn will soon be too concerned with Venezuela to worry about it much😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Latest email from the Hacked Off campaign for those of you who haven't had the pleasure already - it's an absolute pearler!

Dear supporters,
 

Following yesterday's revelations that the Mail Online’s journalism has been categorised as ‘uncredible’ by an independent anti-fake news company, the Daily Mail is now calling for its classification to be revised.
 

The Mail Online has hit out at the company for its 'egregiously erroneous' trust rating, which is equal to Russian Government-backed news platforms Sputnik and Russia Today.
 

Help us in our fight to protect the public and uphold journalistic standards
 

A Mail Online spokesperson said they were seeking “to have this egregiously erroneous classification resolved as soon as possible.”
 

The Mail Group have good reason to be concerned, and they’re right to criticise the fact that their credibility classification is equal to RT. Because when it comes standards breaches, the Mail Group is worse!
 

Russia Today, which has been criticised as an engine of propaganda for the Russian Government is, like all broadcasters, regulated independently by Ofcom. If they break the rules, they face a proper investigation and meaningful sanctions. But the Mail’s titles are members of the IPSO system, which is controlled by the newspapers - so a lot of unethical conduct doesn’t even get investigated, and complaints which are accepted are often handled unfairly.
 

Yet despite all of IPSO’s loopholes which allow misconduct to go unrecorded, Mail Group titles were still responsible for nearly 5 times as many code breach investigations than RT from 2017 to 2018. A simple online search of publicly available information on code breach investigations gave these figures. While the two systems are very different (there is no legally required independent regulation for newspapers, and no rules on impartiality - the latter is one thing all sides agree on), the numbers on investigations support the rating given.
 

VuNwMHqfe7R5KKw77OmT_Yd7wi8swWaL326upb3ONP2mws5FbYtA8KR8SNl4Oi_xFj8RC53vX-sOX1J9Z8SKtg0aCRrPqVG5pLUBj_3_xlwNwEkXAEfEbHPymAw_h1LAON_efF0vlvAYJ054xmm1Lxvk4wiFGnYUwvIQd10HvfwNYRqOX6eABte6ZRM0PkJYL_Bbej59wdx_H0tFSKTMEAsULVSzjIPd-3dB6NsrTh396m7xFF8SABR83MDVLDHf38Gwf6TIf7SYmmyj

 

Ofcom has effective powers across broadcasting media, and has the ability to revoke broadcast licenses in certain cases.
 

In an outline of its ratings system, the anti-fake news company NewsGuard said news websites are given a green rating if they “avoid deceptive headlines”, keep to practices that meet “basic standards of accuracy and accountability” and “are trying to communicate news, information, and opinion that they believe is accurate”.


This only further cements the need for greater public understanding of media reliability, and the support independent fact-checking companies can offer to those ends, as well as underlines the need for a mandated independent press regulator; as broadcast media already has.


  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Latest email from the Hacked Off campaign for those of you who haven't had the pleasure already - it's an absolute pearler!

Dear supporters,
 

 

Following yesterday's revelations that the Mail Online’s journalism has been categorised as ‘uncredible’ by an independent anti-fake news company, the Daily Mail is now calling for its classification to be revised.
 

 

The Mail Online has hit out at the company for its 'egregiously erroneous' trust rating, which is equal to Russian Government-backed news platforms Sputnik and Russia Today.
 

 

Help us in our fight to protect the public and uphold journalistic standards
 

 

A Mail Online spokesperson said they were seeking “to have this egregiously erroneous classification resolved as soon as possible.”
 

 

The Mail Group have good reason to be concerned, and they’re right to criticise the fact that their credibility classification is equal to RT. Because when it comes standards breaches, the Mail Group is worse!
 

 

Russia Today, which has been criticised as an engine of propaganda for the Russian Government is, like all broadcasters, regulated independently by Ofcom. If they break the rules, they face a proper investigation and meaningful sanctions. But the Mail’s titles are members of the IPSO system, which is controlled by the newspapers - so a lot of unethical conduct doesn’t even get investigated, and complaints which are accepted are often handled unfairly.
 

 

Yet despite all of IPSO’s loopholes which allow misconduct to go unrecorded, Mail Group titles were still responsible for nearly 5 times as many code breach investigations than RT from 2017 to 2018. A simple online search of publicly available information on code breach investigations gave these figures. While the two systems are very different (there is no legally required independent regulation for newspapers, and no rules on impartiality - the latter is one thing all sides agree on), the numbers on investigations support the rating given.
 

 

VuNwMHqfe7R5KKw77OmT_Yd7wi8swWaL326upb3ONP2mws5FbYtA8KR8SNl4Oi_xFj8RC53vX-sOX1J9Z8SKtg0aCRrPqVG5pLUBj_3_xlwNwEkXAEfEbHPymAw_h1LAON_efF0vlvAYJ054xmm1Lxvk4wiFGnYUwvIQd10HvfwNYRqOX6eABte6ZRM0PkJYL_Bbej59wdx_H0tFSKTMEAsULVSzjIPd-3dB6NsrTh396m7xFF8SABR83MDVLDHf38Gwf6TIf7SYmmyj

 

 

 

Ofcom has effective powers across broadcasting media, and has the ability to revoke broadcast licenses in certain cases.
 

 

In an outline of its ratings system, the anti-fake news company NewsGuard said news websites are given a green rating if they “avoid deceptive headlines”, keep to practices that meet “basic standards of accuracy and accountability” and “are trying to communicate news, information, and opinion that they believe is accurate”.

 


This only further cements the need for greater public understanding of media reliability, and the support independent fact-checking companies can offer to those ends, as well as underlines the need for a mandated independent press regulator; as broadcast media already has.

 

 

 

Did you know Lefty, arch-Remaniac Geordie Greig took over as editor of the DM last September and that its sales have dropped dramatically as a consequence? No, you didn't did you? 😀

The DM, which was one of Britain's main bulwarks against the Soros-funded campaign to undo Brexit is fast losing its RW readers.

image.png.5dc172be3e300776febab82c2c5edb0c.png

image.png.67ec6f45333d297b39275101590ffef5.png

 

Edited by Jools

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers CM. Just tried out the NewsGuard system. Rather interesting, Breitbart gets a massive red warning.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Herman said:

If you want hard Brexit you will have to have a hard border in Ireland. 

What's a 'hard' Brexit? Sounds like BBC/Guardian talk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

Jools, those articles completely bust the Project Fear myths apart. Keep 'em coming, bro.

Here's another beauty concerning Airbus courtesy of Guido, RtB 👍:

image.png.9b3c6c9c1ad08685baf54bc71a68664d.png

Airbus have always been more than willing to rant about Brexit, even when they aren’t being prodded by the Government. Surely their enthusiasm for relentless remoaning at politically convenient moments can’t be anything to do with the astonishing sum of €64,172,543 Airbus have received from the EU in just the last five years. Almost €13 million of taxpayers money was funnelled their way last year alone. No wonder they like the EU so much… 🛩️😜

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Parliament - Rotten to the core?

How Yvette Cooper and the Remainers
will thwart Brexit next week

image.png.e5129c093c9f9d410a531afd2d50baf8.png

Remainer MPs could destroy Brexit with the Speaker’s help

On Monday, Labour MP Yvette Cooper presented a Private Member's Bill in Parliament. Unlike most such Bills, this one really could have the effect of stopping the UK from exiting the EU on 29 March.

The Bill amends the Withdrawal Bill which the House passed last year. It would create a legal mechanism whereby the House of Commons can instruct the Prime Minister to ask the EU for an extension to Article 50 in the absence of an agreed Withdrawal Agreement from the EU.

If the Bill is passed, Theresa May has until 26 February 2019 to get a Withdrawal Agreement passed, on which date she would then have to give the Commons the chance to insist that the PM seeks an extension to Article 50. She would then be legally obliged to seek that extension.

If the EU27 agreed to the extension, Brexit would effectively be halted.

More rules to be torn up?

As a Private Member’s bill, it would not normally be given priority for a Second Reading, as it has not been introduced by the Government. In other words, it should not have any chance of becoming law.

In order for this to happen, the rules of the House would have to be changed. Regrettably, arch-Remoaner John Bercow MP, Speaker of the House, has already torn up the rules of the House once, and it seems highly likely that he will do so again in order to allow this Bill to bypass all normal protocols and rules.

In this event, the default position of a World Trade Brexit on WTO terms on 29 March could be halted. If the EU agree to an extension of article 50, this is likely to be for many months, possibly even to the end of this year.

Observations

We don’t only have Remainer MPs forgetting about the fundamentals of democracy and failing to respect the Referendum result.

We now also face a Speaker who has no respect for the rules of the House and who seems likely to do everything he can to break these rules in order to prevent Brexit.

These moves would be unprecedented and quite extraordinary. We would be seeing the ruling class defying the will of the people by deliberately tearing up Parliamentary procedures in order to get their way and thwart Brexit.

Do these people have NO concept of the outrage which would fall on them from the country at large?

“LET’S BE CLEAR”

For once we will abandon our moderate language to make the point loud and clear :-

Do these deluded, self-indulgent cretins in Parliament have no idea that they are playing with fire?

Not only would this create a precedent which means that no Government could govern effectively in the future, but the risk of civil disobedience on a massive scale will rise to proportions never before seen.

They MUST stop and think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's another article from KiO's favourite site concerning students & teachers so he will be especially interested in its content:

Facts for younger voters

The truth about freedom of movement,
and studying and working in the EU

Juncker Youth

© EU Commission

With the majority of young people having voted Remain, and with the majority being told that Brexit will damage them, we thought they might like some simple, official facts.

Brexit Facts4EU.org Summary

Freedom to study or live in the EU

  • 99% of British people do not use freedom of movement for living abroad
  • 99.5% of students do not use EU’s 'Erasmus+' studying programme

These facts come from the EU Commission and from the recognised British educational organisations. They are official figures and we have all the detail to back up the facts, as with everything we publish. (Sources at end of article.)

Brexit Facts4EU.org Summary for Young Voters

  • 99% of British people of working age do not live in another EU member state
  • Proportion of working-age Brits living abroad actually fell in the 10 years before the Referendum
  • Less than 10,000 higher education students study abroad, out of 1.84 million
  • 99.5% of HE students do NOT use Erasmus+, the EU’s exchange programme

Erasmus+

© Facts4EU.Org 2019    [ Sources: Official EU Commission statistics | Universities UK ]

Would as many young people have voted remain if they had known the facts?

Young people were more likely to vote for Remain in the EU Referendum. Figures vary, but here is the result of the YouGov poll after the vote:-

  • 18-24       71% Remain, 29% Leave
  • 25-49       54% Remain, 46% Leave
  • 50-64       40% Remain, 60% Leave
  • 65+          36% Remain, 64% Leave

Broadly, the under 25s were almost twice as likely to vote Remain as the over 65s.

Why do young people tend to support Remain?

Brexit Facts4EU.Org looked at what one Remainer campaign group is saying. Here are some excerpts from ‘Our Future Our Choice’, which is the ‘youth arm’ of the large Remain groups. It was set up for young people and has serious backing from three large Remain organisations.

'Our future our choice' (OFOC)

“We believe that there is no good Brexit deal for young people.”

“If it is a hard Brexit, we will be so furious with the wanton destruction inflicted on us that we will knock down any and all of the barriers imposed between us and Europe.”

“The outcome will impact us the most: we are losing our rights to live, work and study anywhere in our continent.”

- ‘Our Future Our Choice’ website – a Remain campaign group

‘Our Future Our Choice’ is funded by Best for Britain, Open Britain, and The European Movement. This means that indirectly they receive funding from the foreign billionaire George Soros.

Observations

The young care about their freedoms

One common claim that is made by young people is that Brexit will limit their freedoms. As we have shown above, the simple facts are that the freedoms they wish to protect are barely used by British people – young and old.

And the ‘freedom to study’ could easily be replicated in a simple deal between the UK and the EU, in the same way that British students used to study abroad before EU membership as a result of bilateral deals with the individual countries in Europe.

None of this requires EU membership.

Open letter to young people

Dear young voter,

It is self-evident that young people are the future of the United Kingdom. It grieves us that so many of you have had to suffer indoctrination throughout your education, up to and including university tuition.

teachers

© Facts4EU.Org 2019

The above chart gives you some idea. Now you may say that this just shows that highly-educated people back Remain.

But wouldn’t you like to question whether your teachers and lecturers are in fact educated about the EU? We have yet to see a university lecturer who backs Remain who has anything like the knowledge about EU membership that we have. We’re talking about having facts, not rhetoric based on dreams and wishes.

Instead, you might question why it is that, pro-rata, 4 times as many higher education teaching staff use the EU’s Erasmus+ programme, compared to students? We would suggest that it’s the staff who are the ones getting the benefit, not you.

Thirst for knowledge

Young people like you have a thirst for knowledge, or you wouldn't be reading this. We certainly did when we were young, and many of us would like to think we have retained this into adulthood and maturity.

We applaud young people for questioning ideas. The irony here is that we probably share a lot of the thoughts you have about being open to the outside world, and the opportunities this presents for travel and broadening the mind.

The difference between us is that we know how inward-looking and insular the EU has been in its lifetime, and we want the UK to be outward-looking and global.

We look at the EU and the world based on facts. And the facts show that what many of you have been taught is... less than the complete picture, shall we say.

All we ask is that you have an open, enquiring mind. Look at the thousands of facts on our site and compare with the platitudes you are given by the Remain side. Wouldn’t you prefer to decide based on reality, not idealistic guesswork?

[ Sources: EU Commission | Eurostat | Universities UK | TES | HESA | YouGov | Our Future Our Choice ] - 24 Jan 2019

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Mr Apples said:

Interesting piece from today's Daily Mash (and you can substitute Norman Steele's name for that of your favourite swivel-eyed Pink'un poster). 🤪🤣

Apples

ARE you a pants-wetting Remoaner who’s worried about no-deal Brexit? Here Wetherspoons regular Norman Steele answers your questions at 10am with a pint.

Should I be worried about food shortages?

F*ck off. We’ll grow our own food. All you need is soil and seeds, and male animals and lady animals. I wish Remoaners would stop overcomplicating things.

If there’s a short-term problem – which there won’t be – we can always do a Dunkirk and get our brave ‘little ships’ to go to a supermarket in Calais. I’m getting choked up just thinking about it.

Could there be civil unrest?

There will be if May’s traitor’s deal goes through. Me, Brian and Dave have agreed to make petrol bombs and do a riot. This is in no way bullsh*t p*sshead bravado caused by 11 pints in Spoons.

Are we heading for an economic disaster? It certainly looks like it.

Project Fear 3.0, mate. Sony may be f*cking off but we’ll just make better tellies. They’ll probably be totally interactive so you can sh*g Keeley Hawes in Bodyguard

Should I start stockpiling medicines I need?

Nah. We’re a plucky, ‘can do’ nation. Make your own medicines from whatever you’ve got in the house. A few aspirins here, a bit of Benylin there. If you’re still feeling peaky have a few pints in Spoons.

In any case, we survived the war. Missing a few heart attack pills is nothing to this bulldog race who laughed in the face of U-boat attacks.

Why do you keep irrelevantly and offensively mentioning the war?

Because it’s the finest moment in our proud island history. Also I don’t know any other history because the kings-and-queens rubbish on History channel hasn’t got tanks or the SS.

No, seriously, what if I lose my job?

What’s the problem? More time to spend in Spoons.

👍😂

Tim Martin did a Q&A at one of his pubs in Portsmouth to explain Brexit to people. Unfortunately for him some people, that knew what they were talking about, turned up. He had to shut it down early due to heckling and disturbances, or in modern parlance, sensible questions.

Equally amusing news, Esther McVey put up a link to help explain WTO rules. It didn't work. But then again, she was reponsible for this doozy, which she still hasn't noticed it contradicts her.

https://twitter.com/EstherMcVey1/status/1086555416308391938

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Barnier on Irish border with no deal

“We will have to find an operational way of carrying out checks and controls without putting back in place a border," 

How odd! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jools said:

The above chart gives you some idea. Now you may say that this just shows that highly-educated people back Remain.

But wouldn’t you like to question whether your teachers and lecturers are in fact educated about the EU? We have yet to see a university lecturer who backs Remain who has anything like the knowledge about EU membership that we have. We’re talking about having facts, not rhetoric based on dreams and wishes.

Instead, you might question why it is that, pro-rata, 4 times as many higher education teaching staff use the EU’s Erasmus+ programme, compared to students? We would suggest that it’s the staff who are the ones getting the benefit, not you.

Oh good, another copy/paste job full of waffle that doesn't actually mean anything. It's a sad indictment on Britain that we don't take advantage of ERASMUS programmes etc. Young people want choices. Whether they use them or not should not impact their right to have them. Would you take away somebody's right to vote in every election if they didn't participate in European elections? An absolutely ludicrous argument to even try to pursue.

Spurious claims that "we know loads about the EU so trust us, not academics who actually work in it and use the mechanisms of it on a regular basis" is exactly the sort of delusional **** that put us in this mess.

"We suggest it's the staff getting the benefit...blahblah" HAHAHAHAHAHA - you don't truly believe this ****e, surely? Nobody is quite that thick (except maybe mad moy).

The fact so few young people use EU projects is not some damning indictment on EU projects, which are a fantastic experience and opportunity. Rather, it is a damning indictment on the youth service here being savaged to the point where young people have little information on their opportunities. My Dad used to do youth work 15ish years ago before it was decimated - he took a group of kids who had grown up in care to Poland for 10 days to meet groups from 6 different countries on a multi-lateral youth experience - most of those kids had never been out of the country. That is the kind of opportunity that you want to deny young people.

Again, you're copy/pasting absolute nonsense with no idea what you're talking about. Goebbels would be proud of the nonsense that "EUFacts" spouts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's becoming clearer by the day that there won't be a General Election nor will there be a second vote so I guess in the end there will be a deal of some sort. Either May's deal or a kind of No Deal with a lot of pluses. Some will call it a hard Brexit some will think it's a soft one but it will be a Brexit.

😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Van wink said:

Barnier on Irish border with no deal

“We will have to find an operational way of carrying out checks and controls without putting back in place a border," 

How odd! 

He hasn't got a solution though. They're investigating the current technological options, but even with a solution, it wouldn't be ready in two months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Well, it's becoming clearer by the day that there won't be a General Election nor will there be a second vote so I guess in the end there will be a deal of some sort. Either May's deal or a kind of No Deal with a lot of pluses. Some will call it a hard Brexit some will think it's a soft one but it will be a Brexit.

😀

Yep.....and Billy BS will claim its what he predicted 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Well, it's becoming clearer by the day that there won't be a General Election nor will there be a second vote so I guess in the end there will be a deal of some sort. Either May's deal or a kind of No Deal with a lot of pluses. Some will call it a hard Brexit some will think it's a soft one but it will be a Brexit.

😀

I think the country is shagged whatever the outcome. Even if we remain our friends in Europe will look at us as if we have dog doo on our shirts.

Smiley face.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×