OT - Salisbury Poisoning

[Andy_Faber]

...and thereby lies the tragedy. You’re right Andy, the EU will have to change...many Remainers agree with that...but we could have been a major part of bringing about that change had we not decided to throw a strop and chuck the baby out with the bath water.
How the hell you can conclude that the EU will be poorer than the UK in a decade’s time is totally beyond me. Where’s the evidence and if that’s the case, why did you vote ‘Remain’?

There's no evidence, its just an IMO Ra, a feeling, and reading the tea leaves of the last couple of years. There's not been a single election in an EU country where anti-EU parties have not been in the ascendancy, the populace just don't like what EU are pushing at them. And I said EU the organisation not its constituent parts. And answering your last question, I voted Remain because I believed Remain, knowing what I know now I would still vote remain BUT unlike you I accept the decision and my big frustration is that we haven't make a decent job of the divorce. On the subject of not accepting the decision, did you see the EU flags at The Proms last night? Masterminded by my social media pal Bill, who now regrets my advice to b*stardise the EU flag and use bigger stars, they just looked like dark blue flags on-screen

[ramAnag]

There's no evidence, its just an IMO Ra, a feeling, and reading the tea leaves of the last couple of years. There's not been a single election in an EU country where anti-EU parties have not been in the ascendancy, the populace just don't like what EU are pushing at them. And I said EU the organisation not its constituent parts. And answering your last question, I voted Remain because I believed Remain, knowing what I know now I would still vote remain BUT unlike you I accept the decision and my big frustration is that we haven't make a decent job of the divorce. On the subject of not accepting the decision, did you see the EU flags at The Proms last night? Masterminded by my social media pal Bill, who now regrets my advice to b*stardise the EU flag and use bigger stars, they just looked like dark blue flags on-screen

Sorry, didn’t see it so no idea about the flags. You have however totally confused me.
You voted ‘Remain’ because you believed it was the best way forward. More to the point...you say, ‘knowing what I know now I would still vote ‘Remain’...so why the hell go along with it?
You are an intelligent member of the electorate who is being dragged, clearly against your better judgement, along by a minority decision based on proven lies made by an ‘organisation’ that has been proved to have shown disrespect for and ultimately broken electoral law. Does not compute!

[Andy_Faber]

Simple Ra I live in the real world, we are leaving the EU and that being the case EVERYONE, inc me, you, Gina bl@@dy Miilar, EU flag Bill, the frankly useless HM government snd opposition SHOULD be pouring every ounce of effort into making Brexit work for UK. That approach stems from four decades in industry as a boss and a pleb at various times, where, when a task was given to me, I considered two things: is it legal? Is it ethical? And both those being yes, id get on with it, entrusting my boss with seeing a bigger picture

[MadAmster]

Simple Ra I live in the real world, we are leaving the EU and that being the case EVERYONE, inc me, you, Gina bl@@dy Miilar, EU flag Bill, the frankly useless HM government snd opposition SHOULD be pouring every ounce of effort into making Brexit work for UK. That approach stems from four decades in industry as a boss and a pleb at various times, where, when a task was given to me, I considered two things: is it legal? Is it ethical? And both those being yes, id get on with it, entrusting my boss with seeing a bigger picture

Abserblumminlootly!!

This poor excuse for a leadership has had 2 years to put together a strategy of what they wanted out of the deal, what they wanted to put to the EU in the negotiations, what they were prepared to let go, what they were prepared to water down and what was an absolute must and therefore non-negotiable.

They finally, just a couple of weeks ago, came up with a hotch potch of requirements that don't deliver Brexit. It's a Hokey Cokey idea in which we are half in annd half out, no longer IN the EU but not completely OUT of it either.

Too far IN to satisfy a Brexiteer and too far OUT to satisfy a Remainer.

Watered down Customs deal. Freedom of movement under another name.

Basically, nobody will be happy with the deal.

Some hold on to the thought that a "no deal" has the safety net of the WTO trade deal and tariffs. Now, the Donald is talking about maybe scuppering the WTO.

[MadAmster]

A firend of mine shared a meme on FB detailing all the things the EU hav done for us. Much along the lines of the "what have the Romans....." sketch from the life of Brian. Things like European arrest warrants, cleaner air and such like.......

Another friend posted the following as a comment.......

They created single thread business opportunity thus destroying local free enterprise through unobtainable procurement contracts, which in turn put many small businesses out of business..They allowed the corporates to prosper at the expense of others due to their desire to globalize via corporate giants...They have done little to stem the use of non recyclable materials, which could be achieved very quickly..They have allowed invasive dangerous cultures to flourish throughout Europe, placing us all on the back foot...Peace was in Europe prior to the creation of the EU, which initially was known as "The Common Market" six countries based on trade, not twenty eight, most of which are broke and supported by three at best the rest mainly ex communist with their hand out...Why anyone thinks trade opportunities within a market that represents only 15% of global trade is a good thing is beyond me as anyone that has a business accumen knows senior European CEOs will not want to lose their biggest EU client as that would represent a huge loss to them financially and create massive job losses in Germany, France and other European countries..As for all these decisions we are more than capable of decision making as long as we have the right leadership, which at present is sadly lacking..

Another reply stated......

As an aside one doesn't need to work in mental health to realise that constant change both destabilises/disempowers older people.The market trading 'Metric Martyrs' were disgracefully prosecuted to the full extent of the law for wanting to sell older folks fruit and veg in a language they could understand.Watch the prophetically great You Tube Oxford Union memory lane video of Peter Shore.That,Arthur Scargill's continuing opposition to the EU(just WHEN were the financial 'books' last signed off?!?)and the contrast between two TV opinions cemented my decision to vote the same way as I had in the 1970's.Firstly a student worried whether leaving would affect his ability to gap year meander around Italy.Secondly a Hartlepool fisherman on his uppers(with over quota limit fish being thrown back to die)contemplated bankruptcy.The amount of fish they are allowed to catch doesn't cover the licence/marine fuel costs.Trying to diversify into crustaceans--the EU intends to apply quotas to them too(pushing fishing to the extinction suffered by steelworking/coalmining)!!.


The meme ends with the old 70 years of peace due to the EU which has only existed since 1992...... Might NATO have had something to do with the keeping of the peace in Europe? Meme is printed below...............

[mistaram]

Here's me thinking this was a thread on the Salisbury Poisioning are well

[ramAnag]

Simple Ra I live in the real world, we are leaving the EU and that being the case EVERYONE, inc me, you, Gina bl@@dy Miilar, EU flag Bill, the frankly useless HM government snd opposition SHOULD be pouring every ounce of effort into making Brexit work for UK. That approach stems from four decades in industry as a boss and a pleb at various times, where, when a task was given to me, I considered two things: is it legal? Is it ethical? And both those being yes, id get on with it, entrusting my boss with seeing a bigger picture

Andy...’I live in the real world, we are leaving the EU’. Really? Is that totally decided then?
I don’t think so. There is still a lot of water to flow under the proverbial bridge and as much chance of a second referendum, imo, as there is of a no deal Brexit or any sort of deal on Brexit.
What if there is a second referendum and what if that second referendum concludes that they’ve looked at the future and if the ‘future is Brexit’ they don’t bloody like it? Does that then become your ‘real world’.
Just answer the following few Yes/No questions.
1) Was the referendum ever anything more than advisory?
2) Were people ever sufficiently well informed about complexities such as NI and the implications for trade?
3) Did a genuine majority of the electorate vote in favour of Brexit given that this was a ‘two horse race’?
4) Did the Remain campaign abide by electoral law in the run up to the Referendum?
5) Were voters truthfully informed by claims in the Referendum campaign?
6) Since June 2016 have you been encouraged by the result of the Referendum as far as the UK’s future in the next two decades is concerned?
Six serious questions which I very much doubt you’ll be able to answer with anything other than a ‘No’. That being the case why, oh why, do you persist in describing it as the ‘real world’? There’s still time to change from something which you have admitted elsewhere you don’t actually agree with.

[Andy_Faber]

Andy...’I live in the real world, we are leaving the EU’. Really? Is that totally decided then?
I don’t think so. There is still a lot of water to flow under the proverbial bridge and as much chance of a second referendum, imo, as there is of a no deal Brexit or any sort of deal on Brexit.
What if there is a second referendum and what if that second referendum concludes that they’ve looked at the future and if the ‘future is Brexit’ they don’t bloody like it? Does that then become your ‘real world’.
Just answer the following few Yes/No questions.
1) Was the referendum ever anything more than advisory?
Legally it wasn't mandatory but that's semantics pushed by in denial remainers (I won't use the phrase Remoaners, sloganeering has been part of the problem through all this
2) Were people ever sufficiently well informed about complexities such as NI and the implications for trade?
I'll give you a no on that one but the Irish border and trade were irrelevancies to a good proportion of Leave voters, they wer (and still are) more bothered about the impact of immigration and loss of Sovereignty
3) Did a genuine majority of the electorate vote in favour of Brexit given that this was a ‘two horse race’?
Yes
4) Did the Remain campaign abide by electoral law in the run up to the Referendum?
I think you mean the Leave campaign, and I doubt it, but as I've said before on here 'There were no clean hands', it was Leeds v. Millwall not The Gentlemen versus The Players
5) Were voters truthfully informed by claims in the Referendum campaign?See 4 above
6) Since June 2016 have you been encouraged by the result of the Referendum as far as the UK’s future in the next two decades is concerned?Yes on balance, despite the unfortunate fact that there will be winners and losers
Six serious questions which I very much doubt you’ll be able to answer with anything other than a ‘No’. That being the case why, oh why, do you persist in describing it as the ‘real world’? There’s still time to change from something which you have admitted elsewhere you don’t actually agree with.

See responses in bold above

[MadAmster]

Andy...’I live in the real world, we are leaving the EU’. Really? Is that totally decided then?
I don’t think so. There is still a lot of water to flow under the proverbial bridge and as much chance of a second referendum, imo, as there is of a no deal Brexit or any sort of deal on Brexit.
What if there is a second referendum and what if that second referendum concludes that they’ve looked at the future and if the ‘future is Brexit’ they don’t bloody like it? Does that then become your ‘real world’.
Just answer the following few Yes/No questions.
1) Was the referendum ever anything more than advisory? Legally the referendum was advisory. That was stated in the Bill/Act making it possible. Cameron then said openly, on many an occasion, he would abide by the result. Because he didn't agree with the result he stepped down to let someone else sort out the mess.
2) Were people ever sufficiently well informed about complexities such as NI and the implications for trade? For trade, just about. For NI, absolutely not
3) Did a genuine majority of the electorate vote in favour of Brexit given that this was a ‘two horse race’? Numbers semantics again. Unfortunately, Cameron et al let this be a "most votes cast wins" poll and failed to see what might happen when people applied "Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics" logic to the numbers. People are now massaging the numbers to meet their own criteria. On the simple premise Cameron et al used of 50% + 1 wins, Leave won the day. People who question the validity of the vote, point to 63% of those entitled to vote NOT having voted leave and push that as being the "real" result. They miss the reality that "the other side" can use the same logic to claim that 65.27% of those entitled to vote DIDN'T vote Remain. Three different ways of calculating the result, as far as I can see. Two out of the three were for Leave. One of those two was the "50%+1 "rule" which, I believe, just about everybody understood prior to the vote taking place, to be the criteria for the vote.
4) Did the Remain campaign abide by electoral law in the run up to the Referendum? No, and neither did the Leave campaign
5) Were voters truthfully informed by claims in the Referendum campaign? No. A lot was don't listen to what I say, listen to what I mean. The NHS £350M a week issue was never a promise. It was more of a this is one thing we could do..... They did overlook the fact that our net payment to the EU is approximately half of that figure. The other half comes back in the form of grants and subsidies.I don't think you can "disqualify" either side for the half truths like this one that were told in the run up. Half truths and worse are the lifeblood of all electioneering campaigns.
6) Since June 2016 have you been encouraged by the result of the Referendum as far as the UK’s future in the next two decades is concerned? No. Simply due to 2+years of empty talk and rhetoric on the part of Mayhem et al when they should have been sitting down seriously and coming up with a plan for Brexit to present to and argue with the EU. There should have been 3 categories of wants/wishes, as in all negotiations. There will be the nice to haves that you can agree to ditch. The wants that you are prepared to do an amount of compromising on and the red line things that you are not going to budge on. Those lists should have been ready and being discussed with the EU for getting on 2 years now. Agree point by point and start building the infrastructure and procedures to account for that agreement. We are now 199 days from Brexit and things like extra parking at ports, extra Customs Officers etc etc etc are still, at best, in embryo form. The government has let everybody down. The opposition hasn't opposed, nor should it because of the result of the referendum, however, they have also failed to push Mayhem et al into real and meaningful action. Agreeing with tings they agree on and putting in amendents where they feel it necessary. They too have let the people down. The Dutch say that "ruling is looking ahead and taking the necessary measures to get the best out of every situation". UK Politicians have not looked ahead. They have dithered and dallied their way into a crisis for the populace.
Six serious questions which I very much doubt you’ll be able to answer with anything other than a ‘No’. That being the case why, oh why, do you persist in describing it as the ‘real world’? There’s still time to change from something which you have admitted elsewhere you don’t actually agree with.

Questions aimed at Andy but I would like to answer them as well. You all know my own point of view but I shall attempt to answer them as honestly as I can from a neutral viewpoint. Answers in bold in the quote above this comment........

[ramAnag]

See responses in bold above

So...
1) Leave semantics out of it...it was never mandatory...only ever advisory...that’s a fact.
2) That’s a ‘no’...what was irrelevant to a ‘good proportion’ of Leavers is itself entirely irrelevant to the question.
3) Sorry you’re just being stubborn. 37% can never be a genuine majority of 100% for a single issue Y/N (In/Out) vote.
4) I did mean the Leave campaign, my mistake. There may have been ‘no clean hands’ but only one side has been fined for breaking electoral law. Why do we have these rules if breaking them is inconsequential? To take your football analogy a step further, the leaders of the Leave campaign are the political equivalent of QPR.
5) That’ll be another ‘no’ then.
6) You’re just not being honest with yourself there. Only recently you said that, in the event of a second Referendum, you’d vote ‘Remain’ again. You voted ‘Remain’ in 2016...you’ve done your best to put a positive slant on things since, but given all the circumstances and developments since you still recently admitted you’d vote ‘Remain’ again. It’s impossible to hold that view while still claiming to have been ‘encouraged’ by what the post Brexit future holds for the UK.