Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 2:52 pm

martin_p wrote:It just said ‘Leave’ on the ballot paper.

Loving the good old ‘everyone knew what leave meant’ claim, it’s a proper golden oldie that. Still a lie, but it now qualifies as a classic lie I think.

Is it me or are you trying to go round in a perpetual circle where you claim,

1,"it just said leave on the ballot paper"

2. Then People point out what the PM , and everybody else who actually took an interest in the pre referendum debates that went on for around a good 18 months up to the vote , agreed on what leaving the EU actually meant.

3 Then you acknowledge,
ECJ,
single market,
freedom of movement
Customs union

4 then you claim they were all delivered in May's deal but only if the eu agreed to the removal of the backstop.

5 Then you go back to "it just said leave on the ballot paper"

That's jumping a roundabout that made you look silly, then asking for another go!

Marty's new mantra

POST. SCHOOLED. PETARD. REPEAT...

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 2:56 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:Is it me or are you trying to go round in a perpetual circle where you claim,

1,"it just said leave on the ballot paper"

2. Then People point out what the PM , and everybody else who actually took an interest in the pre referendum debates that went on for around a good 18 months up to the vote , agreed on what leaving the EU actually meant.

3 Then you acknowledge,
ECJ,
single market,
freedom of movement
Customs union

4 then you claim they were all delivered in May's deal but only if the eu agreed to the removal of the backstop.

5 Then you go back to "it just said leave on the ballot paper"

That's jumping a roundabout that made you look silly, then asking for another go!

Marty's new mantra

POST. SCHOOLED. PETARD. REPEAT...

Brexit revisionism at its finest.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 3:01 pm

TheFamilyCat wrote:But you all claimed that you knew what you were voting for. And now you admit you voted for something that isn’t possible. So why did you bother?

I knew what I was voting for. The backstop materialised after I voted

The only thing I admit it is that the backstop prevents a true Leave.

It doesn't mean a true Leave is impossible.

claretonthecoast1882 · Post by **claretonthecoast1882** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 3:01 pm

Reading the last few pages of this it is really hard to work out why nothing has progressed in 3 years.

Like 2 sets of kids staring at each other shouting " I know you are you said you are"

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 3:01 pm

martin_p wrote:Brexit revisionism at its finest.

Full length mirror.

NottsClaret · Post by **NottsClaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 3:02 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:Is it me or are you trying to go round in a perpetual circle...

You're on page 248. There's a chance it's both of you.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 3:06 pm

NottsClaret wrote:You're on page 248. There's a chance it's both of you.

There wouldn't have been a need for a page 2.

If one side of the arguement had accepted, that in a democracy , sometimes, you lose.......

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 3:22 pm

Couldn't make it up.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 3:24 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:Pascoe Watson, just like the Deutsch Bank chief economic forecaster, (who said positive things about no deal) they are both paid for their highly respected opinions.

Unlike you.

And the BMA is a highly regarded medical body but JRM thinks they are idiots. I presume you do to.

By the way Ringo, when you post, the phrase "The lights are on but nobody is at home" often springs to mind.

android · Post by **android** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 3:25 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:You think the BBC is anti-Brexit?

I think the BBC is allowing Brexit lies to become mainstream

To me, if both of us such a wildly differing opinion about the BBC, then its probably doing a good job.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... s-49495706" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thats pretty clear that she said she back Johnstone btw,

You are not going to pull the wool over my eyes that easily Lancaster. If dsr or Ringo had attempted what you have just done you would be calling them a liar!

Your link is the BBC profile of Davidson not the news story of her resignation. So just to be clear, as I said, the BBC story on her resignation made no mention at all of her view that Johnson wants a deal and MPs should vote for it.

As for your linked profile, I can again find no reference to her view that Johnson wants a deal and that MPs should support it so you will have to help me out. It seems the best they could muster, and I assume the bit you are referring to, is "while she would continue to support Johnson, she is known to be deeply unhappy with his pursuit of a possible no deal Brexit". This is immediately followed by lots of detail about her past differences with Johnson over Brexit. Note that the reference to what she actually said is restricted to "support" and immediately qualified by the suggestion that she thinks he is pursuing a no deal Brexit.

So Lancaster, why do you think the BBC was so reluctant to tell us what Davidson actually said?

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 3:25 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Couldn't make it up.

Both posted simultaneously at 3.01.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 3:30 pm

Spijed wrote:And the BMA is a highly regarded medical body but JRM thinks they are idiots. I presume you do to.

By the way Ringo, when you post, the phrase "The lights are on but nobody is at home" often springs to mind.

No I don't think the BMA are idiots. Did JRM say "the BMA are idiots" out of interest?

And looking at your posts, I cant help but think of the phrase-

"You're not as daft as you look are you Spijed!?

You couldn't be!"

TheFamilyCat · Post by **TheFamilyCat** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 3:36 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:I knew what I was voting for. The backstop materialised after I voted

The only thing I admit it is that the backstop prevents a true Leave.

It doesn't mean a true Leave is impossible.

So you admit that you weren’t as informed as you like to think.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 3:42 pm

Canterbury Tales:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... l-election" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 3:42 pm

TheFamilyCat wrote:So you admit that you weren’t as informed as you like to think.

Not at all.

I knew exactly what leave meant.

Leaving the customs union

Ending free movement of people

Leaving the single market

Ending the jurisdiction of the ECJ.

I , like everybody who voted in the 2016 Peoples Vote, INCLUDING REMAIN VOTER, voted, before the idea of an Irish backstop even existed.

I have 2 balls. Neither of them are crystal.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 3:43 pm

android wrote:You are not going to pull the wool over my eyes that easily Lancaster. If dsr or Ringo had attempted what you have just done you would be calling them a liar!

Your link is the BBC profile of Davidson not the news story of her resignation. So just to be clear, as I said, the BBC story on her resignation made no mention at all of her view that Johnson wants a deal and MPs should vote for it.

As for your linked profile, I can again find no reference to her view that Johnson wants a deal and that MPs should support it so you will have to help me out. It seems the best they could muster, and I assume the bit you are referring to, is "while she would continue to support Johnson, she is known to be deeply unhappy with his pursuit of a possible no deal Brexit". This is immediately followed by lots of detail about her past differences with Johnson over Brexit. Note that the reference to what she actually said is restricted to "support" and immediately qualified by the suggestion that she thinks he is pursuing a no deal Brexit.

So Lancaster, why do you think the BBC was so reluctant to tell us what Davidson actually said?

The entire first two paragraphs are about her resignation.

Don't go full Ringo Android, its a horrible place to end up in!

I just went on the BBC website, and searched for "Ruth Davidson" btw

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 3:46 pm

TheFamilyCat wrote:So you admit that you weren’t as informed as you like to think.

Not at all. I was as informed as I could be. Given I dont have access to time travel.

I knew exactly what leave meant.

Leaving the customs union

Ending free movement of people

Leaving the single market

Ending the jurisdiction of the ECJ.

I , like everybody who voted in the 2016 Peoples Vote, INCLUDING REMAIN VOTERS, voted, before the idea of an Irish backstop even existed.

I have 2 balls. Neither of them are crystal.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 3:48 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:The entire first two paragraphs are about her resignation.

Don't go full Ringo Android, its a horrible place to end up in!

Oh I dont know.

Being correct, and on the right side of democracy, isn't as bad as you could ever imagine.

You should try it some time.

At least once........

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:04 pm

android wrote:You are not going to pull the wool over my eyes that easily Lancaster. If dsr or Ringo had attempted what you have just done you would be calling them a liar!

Your link is the BBC profile of Davidson not the news story of her resignation. So just to be clear, as I said, the BBC story on her resignation made no mention at all of her view that Johnson wants a deal and MPs should vote for it.

As for your linked profile, I can again find no reference to her view that Johnson wants a deal and that MPs should support it so you will have to help me out. It seems the best they could muster, and I assume the bit you are referring to, is "while she would continue to support Johnson, she is known to be deeply unhappy with his pursuit of a possible no deal Brexit". This is immediately followed by lots of detail about her past differences with Johnson over Brexit. Note that the reference to what she actually said is restricted to "support" and immediately qualified by the suggestion that she thinks he is pursuing a no deal Brexit.

So Lancaster, why do you think the BBC was so reluctant to tell us what Davidson actually said?

You are entirely correct Android.

Nigel Farage was deeply concerned about the "reassurances" Davidson had received about him wanting a deal. Remember, she was a commited remainer.

That's why the Brexit party has agreed a pact to stand down IF boris will commit to a no deal. They fear a reheated May deal, which they see as a brino.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:10 pm

You see what you want to see Android

I see what I what I read.

You are talking about "while she would continue to support Johnson, she is known to be deeply unhappy with his pursuit of a possible no deal Brexit"

I have to be honest with you as well, a quick google search provided thousands of entries on "ruth davidson resignation letter"

Now we've both seen that letter.

How many lines does she give to saying to she supports Johnson in his search for a deal?

EDIT - one thing you are correct on is that I can't see a copy of that letter on the BBC website (but I saw it on twitter through the BBC twitter account)

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:13 pm

android wrote:You are not going to pull the wool over my eyes that easily Lancaster. If dsr or Ringo had attempted what you have just done you would be calling them a liar!

Your link is the BBC profile of Davidson not the news story of her resignation. So just to be clear, as I said, the BBC story on her resignation made no mention at all of her view that Johnson wants a deal and MPs should vote for it.

As for your linked profile, I can again find no reference to her view that Johnson wants a deal and that MPs should support it so you will have to help me out. It seems the best they could muster, and I assume the bit you are referring to, is "while she would continue to support Johnson, she is known to be deeply unhappy with his pursuit of a possible no deal Brexit". This is immediately followed by lots of detail about her past differences with Johnson over Brexit. Note that the reference to what she actually said is restricted to "support" and immediately qualified by the suggestion that she thinks he is pursuing a no deal Brexit.

So Lancaster, why do you think the BBC was so reluctant to tell us what Davidson actually said?

Try this https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-49158262

Or use the search function yourself and stop assuming something isn’t there if you haven’t seen it (especially if you haven’t looked).

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:15 pm

Cheers Martin, that was the 2nd thing down from the stuff I posted earlier.

People are entitled to think the BBC is biased, I think they haven't done a great job over Brexit coverage, but they at least tried to cover it all.

If you want to see completely biased Brexit coverage, then Guido Fawkes (right) and The Canary (left) are the places to go

Blackrod · Post by **Blackrod** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:16 pm

The Vote was ‘To Leave’. Not ‘Leave with suitable conditions’.

On a separate note Corbyn is such a depressing character. Listening to his durge is like returning to grey and wet after a week in the sun.

Elizabeth · Post by **Elizabeth** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:18 pm

How the fc. k anyone can mistake my posts for Ringo is beyond common sense!
This really is an asylum

Hipper · Post by **Hipper** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:20 pm

claret2018 wrote:The people were promised something that’s impossible to actually deliver. When that finally sinks in with the hardest of devotees then progress can be made on repairing the damage this whole sorry episode has caused.

It's not impossible to deliver.

There are two problems:

1. It is complicated and so it would take a lot of effort as well as a desire on both sides to conclude it fairly.

I've no idea if May's deal is fair to both the UK and the EU.

2. It requires the UK and the EU to know exactly what it wants.

The EU seems to know what it wants but we certainly do not.

The problem is over here and particularly our representatives. Many, including whole parties (Lib Dems, SNP), won't accept the referendum result. Some are also just playing politics.

And of course we have a weak government. Perhaps if May had got a 50 seat majority she could have got things through. And perhaps not as both leading parties, especially the Conservatives, have those within them that could rebel.

What a f.....g mess.

We must leave, otherwise referenda, and even elections, will be worthless exercises.

Our politicians, both government and Parliament, have proved unable or unwilling to come to a deal and I can't see that changing. So we should leave with no deal. Sort out the consequences and get on with life.

That's why I'm for Boris on this one. The rest of his ideas I don't want but if he gets us out of the EU he will have served a useful purpose.

And I voted remain before anyone starts.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:24 pm

Can I just say that if the government Yellowhammer papers were released so people realised the impact of a "No Deal", it would certainly help.

RMutt · Post by **RMutt** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:40 pm

Blackrod wrote:The Vote was ‘To Leave’. Not ‘Leave with suitable conditions’.

On a separate note Corbyn is such a depressing character. Listening to his durge is like returning to grey and wet after a week in the sun.

He’s a politician not part of the entertainment industry.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:41 pm

Elizabeth wrote:How the fc. k anyone can mistake my posts for Ringo is beyond common sense!
This really is an asylum

And If there was ever any doubt, that one of the sad remoaners had set up a parody account order to get off on aping and discrediting me. The above post should dispel that doubt.

Nevertheless, it really is time it was put to pasture.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:45 pm

RMutt wrote:He’s a politician not part of the entertainment industry.

Hang on! Some of us find him highly entertaining!.

Labour - " it's a disgrace that in 2019 theres been a massive rise in child poverty and food banks . We need a labour government to bring this situation to an end. Right now!"

Agree to a general election to end child poverty and food banks then.

Chlorinated Chicken Corbyn - " Erm, no. Let's extend till January 2020, child poverty and food banks will have to wait a bit longer"

Taffy on the wing · Post by **Taffy on the wing** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:47 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Problem is CC is that I don't believe he will do that. And I doubt I'm alone.

Once he gets a majority, he'll do whatever is required to keep his allies on side, and that won't be massive public sector spending.

Spot-on! He's a Pathological liar of the first order.
His sole intention is to drag Britain back to a bygone era, where the Plebs know their place,
and grovel to their landed Masters. Time to consign the whole Tory party to the Dustbin of History!

Taffy on the wing · Post by **Taffy on the wing** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:50 pm

Blackrod wrote:The Vote was ‘To Leave’. Not ‘Leave with suitable conditions’.

On a separate note Corbyn is such a depressing character. Listening to his durge is like returning to grey and wet after a week in the sun.

Boris Johnson...'like a week in the Sun'?.....Maybe you should stay out of it then!

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:51 pm

I knew Ringo would be gold today.

Stalbansclaret · Post by **Stalbansclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:52 pm

I will repeat my earlier post as I can't see anyone bothered to answer the question I asked...a bit like Boris really......What will happen on the Irish border on 1st November if there is a No Deal Brexit ? I really want to know the answer to this practical question which seems pretty fundamental now we (currently) have a Government trying to drive towards this scenario.

PaintYorkClaretnBlue · Post by **PaintYorkClaretnBlue** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:54 pm

Brexit aside, who the hell do you vote for at the next election. I can’t stand the tories but the thought of having Corbyn and Abbot in government fills me with dread!

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:56 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:You need to stop lying to people to win Lowbank.

Tell people the truth, and let them decide, don't try to hoodwink them and hope it doesn't matter.

Surely the last three years have taught us that?

So Lancaster, you are saying the EU are not planning to do anything I put down??

Is that the case?

PaintYorkClaretnBlue · Post by **PaintYorkClaretnBlue** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:56 pm

If Labour found a decent leader and sidekick then they’d stand a chance, as it is I just can’t see them being elected!

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:01 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:And If there was ever any doubt, that one of the sad remoaners had set up a parody account order to get off on aping and discrediting me. The above post should dispel that doubt.

Nevertheless, it really is time it was put to pasture.

I'm not sure why anyone would need to go to such lengths to discredit you, Ringo.

You do a great job of that on your own.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:04 pm

Stalbansclaret wrote:I will repeat my earlier post as I can't see anyone bothered to answer the question I asked...a bit like Boris really......What will happen on the Irish border on 1st November if there is a No Deal Brexit ? I really want to know the answer to this practical question which seems pretty fundamental now we (currently) have a Government trying to drive towards this scenario.

Nothing. It will be business as usual. The forms that businesses fill in on exports may be different from day 1, or there may be a transition period; but there won't be border posts springing up overnight.

They'd need a lot of border posts, mind. I drove from Athlone to Belfast a few weeks back, and just south of Clones you cross the border four times in ten miles. I somehow doubt they will ever put a border post at each one!

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:13 pm

PaintYorkClaretnBlue wrote:Brexit aside, who the hell do you vote for at the next election. I can’t stand the tories but the thought of having Corbyn and Abbot in government fills me with dread!

After today it's pretty clear that Corbyn's a far superior leader than Johnson who can't lead a ****-up in the proverbial brewery.

Abbott might be cringeworthy at times, but she keeps getting elected so she's obviously more competent than her public image suggests, and having her in government is much better than having Dominic Cummings in it. Johnson's a joke, and so is his shambles of a government.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:13 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:You need to stop lying to people to win Lowbank.

Tell people the truth, and let them decide, don't try to hoodwink them and hope it doesn't matter.

Surely the last three years have taught us that?

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/b ... nion_0.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So that’s not an EU army???

25 member states joining together on defence.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:16 pm

Spijed wrote:If that's the case then there would hardly be any remain MPs left.

Even in Scotland, if what you say is true then the Tories could do quite well.

However, almost half voted to remain. Do you think they are suddenly going to change their minds?

: 662DCDCA-41D0-42CA-B935-2815133BBAD0.jpeg (122.58 KiB) Viewed 1839 times

This poll looks like people are are ****** with current MP’s to me.

People are saying there is no support for Boris.

Currently he would win a GE, me thinks.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:18 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/b ... nion_0.pdf

So that’s not an EU army???

25 member states joining together on defence.

Its not an EU Army.

When is Turkey joining the EU Lowbank?

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:19 pm

aggi wrote:Wayhey, more Lowbank bullshit

I have provided the link to the 25 member states coming together on security, word it how you like it’s an EU army.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:20 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:I have provided the link to the 25 member states coming together on security, word it how you like it’s an EU army.

It doesn't matter then does it?

You keep telling yourself its an EU Army.

Knock yourself out

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:23 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Its not an EU Army.

When is Turkey joining the EU Lowbank?

So 25 states joining together on defence is not an EU army

It even shows the comparison of benefits of the USA system to make savings on cost.

Well if faced with absolute proof in writing you are still in denial, you will never accept anything but your own beliefs.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:23 pm

Whose the commander in chief of this EU Army Lowbank?

Whats it TOE?

Is it standanising weaponry across the 25 countries?

What is its uniform?

Where are its bases?

Where are the supply hubs?

Where are the training centres?

Where is its HQ?

Where are its RoE?

Does it have a navy part?

Does it have an airforce part?

etc etc etc

It is not an EU Army

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:23 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:It doesn't matter then does it?

You keep telling yourself its an EU Army.

Knock yourself out

So what is it then that you think it is??

AndrewJB · Post by **AndrewJB** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:24 pm

The Rebel Alliance wins again. Johnson's duplicity with the people and their representatives has come back to bite him. No trust. And another nail in the coffin of an undemocratic no deal exit.

Now we can have a grown up discussion on all sides about what our relationship with the EU should be going forward.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:25 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:So what is it then that you think it is??

What it says it is.

You've provided the link

android · Post by **android** » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:25 pm

martin_p wrote:Try this https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-49158262

Or use the search function yourself and stop assuming something isn’t there if you haven’t seen it (especially if you haven’t looked).

What has your link got to do with my point? Maybe you posted the wrong link but the one I opened was a story back in July and I am talking about the BBC's coverage of Davidson's resignation at the end of August. Something rather important happened in between - you know the proroguing, the coup, the end of democracy and Davidson's resignation shortly afterwards causing much excitement in anti Johnson and anti Brexit camps.

Like Lancaster you are completely missing the point. The BBC trailed her resignation the night before with the personal/politics reasons no doubt expecting her to trash Johnson over Brexit. But it didn't happen. I will give it one more go to get the relevant facts across. The BBC completely failed to report the fact that in her press conference Davidson went to some length to make it clear that she not only supported Johnson but (here it is...) SHE CONTINUES TO BELIEVE HE WANTS A BREXIT DEAL AND SHE URGED MPS TO SUPPORT IT. These rather important facts in CAPITALS were not mentioned AT ALL.

I could tell you why the BBC did this but...oh what's the point... I suspect you will still not accept the simple facts!