 sj |
||
|
||
BS: brexit matters
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: akenaton Date: 09 Sep 17 - 10:35 AM "Walk away Renee".....The EU needs us more than we need them. If that was not the case, they would not be trying so hard to stop us leaving! The walls of the monolith are crumbling and the departure of the UK will result in collapse. Make Britain Great again! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Steve Shaw Date: 09 Sep 17 - 10:48 AM You have that arse about face. They don't need us and they know it. In any case, do you suppose for one minute that, once we're gone, you'll never see another VW, Audi or Beamer on our roads ever again? They are being tough on the terms of our leaving not because they're desperate for us to stay (we've been a pain in the arse ever since Maggie, after all) but because they need to make it clear to all members that leaving has dire consequences and that you can't expect favours. That's not blackmail. That's real life. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Teribus Date: 09 Sep 17 - 11:47 AM Cases Shaw? what ones would you like to discuss? Importation of British Lamb to the EU? Importation of British Beef to the EU? EU Fishing Quotas? The British rebate discussions and agreements made that the EU never honoured? The various supposedly hard and fast national debt to income ratios that were just swept under the carpet when it proved convenient? Please, please, please DO take me on, on this Shaw because I will massacre you on the subject. But let us take this as the starting point: 1: "The EU wants the money they think we should be paying." - Steve Shaw No, they appear to have picked a nice round figure out of thin air. - Nigel Parsons. So tell us Shaw how did the EU arrive at their figure? Fact is you can't, but more importantly, neither can they. 2: "If you have good reason to dispute the amount they're asking for, let's be having it, preferably without the little Englander hubris." - Steve Shaw If they won't tell the UK how this figure has been arrived at, how can we dispute it, either in total or line by line? - Nigel Parsons I know that you have never worked in any sort of commercial, or contractual, environment Shaw but if you present a bill to anyone you must be able to justify your entire bill item by item if requested to do so by the party you expect to pay it. If you cannot then you have to compromise and come to a mutually agreed figure. This I know presents the EU Commission with a great problem, after all they have not been able to present ONE set of audited accounts in the entire history of the EU. 3: "And it's perfectly right that they want a financial settlement resolved before discussing trade arrangements. Why would any rational negotiator want those two issues enmeshed?" - Steve Shaw Maybe we should agree the payment in order to get things moving, and then re-negotiate it later. But better yet, let's get on with things. The EU may not want the two items enmeshed, but they need to take account of their own instructions. - Nigel Parsons Well then Shaw here are the EU's guidelines: "According to European Council (Art. 50) guidelines for Brexit negotiations ". Negotiations under Article 50 TEU will be conducted in transparency and AS A SINGLE PACKAGE. In accordance with the principle that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, individual items cannot be settled separately." So according to their guidelines it most certainly is NOT "perfectly right" to separate the issues IS IT SHAW?? The EU in adopting the stance they have are clearly disobeying their own guidelines. I take it Shaw that you do know what a SINGLE PACKAGE means don't you? The EU Commission clearly don't. I do like your line Why would any rational negotiator want those two issues enmeshed? as I have made clear above that it is the EU that has enmeshed the two, and so, are being described by you as irrational! - Nigel Parsons If ever there was a "Game, Set & Match" on this forum Nigel Parsons destruction of your post (Steve Shaw - 07 Sep 17 - 05:30 PM) was it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Teribus Date: 09 Sep 17 - 11:57 AM SPB-Cooperator - 09 Sep 17 - 09:01 AM "Of course we must pay into the EU indefinitely to compensate half-billion people for the effect our pathetic little hissy fit will have on the structural development of EU member states that are economically lagging behind." That is a joke right? The structural development of the EU, once we leave has got S.F.A. to do with us. Just as in exactly the same way the structural development of the EU BEFORE WE JOINED IT had S.F.A. to do with us. It is an inherently corrupt organisation and we have been doing our best to promote reform from within for over 43 years and we have got nowhere - time to draw stumps and let them get on with it - perhaps us leaving will actually stir them into action that they should have taken decades ago. One thing is for certain if they carry on as they are doing now the whole enterprise will collapse. By the way SPB-Cooperator there is not a single person in the EU today that says it does not need to be reformed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Steve Shaw Date: 09 Sep 17 - 12:40 PM You have given us an unsupported list of supposed cases where the EU has allegedly breached its own rules and guidelines but you have failed to provide any details. The only one that you and Keith have supposedly backed up is one that you have completely misinterpreted. In fact, you've just churned it out again despite the fact that I've already cleared it up for you. I reckon I'd know which house was yours as I passed by as it would be the one with steam coming out of the roof and bullshit oozing from under the doors. Why don't you just calm down (dear) and think before you explode forth here? It's very unimpressive. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 09 Sep 17 - 01:34 PM Steve, So WE don't have to justify anything. THEY have to do the justifying. Obviously yes. They are making a charge on us. Of course they should say what they are charging us for. If we think a charge unjustified, of course we must challenge it. When you check out of a hotel, do you keep making offers until they accept one, or do you wait for the bill and then check it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Iains Date: 09 Sep 17 - 02:15 PM "You have given us an unsupported list of supposed cases where the EU has allegedly breached its own rules and guidelines but you have failed to provide any details." how's about supplying some audited accounts as a starter for 10, or is that a bit of a problem to understand? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 09 Sep 17 - 04:16 PM We are a net contributor because we recognise that it is mutually beneficial to strengthen economies that are lagging behind so that we become a community of equals. Bearing in mind that each state is coming from different postions, and have their own pressures - East Europe decades of the economies controlled fro Moscow, Mediterranean country emerging form fascism. Noone pretends that this is easy to do. Of course there are some who believe that UK should have the right to focus on its own economy at the expense of others, and these are the lowest of the low pathetic excuses for human existance.The sooner this country has its holier than thou arrogance wiped of its face, the better. These are often the same people who resent paying taxes as they earn enough not to need anything from the state. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Stanron Date: 09 Sep 17 - 04:22 PM SPB-Cooperator wrote: Of course there are some who believe that UK should have the right to focus on its own economy at the expense of others, and these are the lowest of the low pathetic excuses for human existance.The sooner this country has its holier than thou arrogance wiped of its face, the better. Wow. I suppose that this might be humour. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Steve Shaw Date: 09 Sep 17 - 04:43 PM You should be asking Teribus and/or Keith, Iains, not me. Sorry mate. They are the can't-back-up-what-they-say merchants. Keith, your silly, tedious hotel metaphor doesn't hold water, so do us a favour and give it up, will you. When I book into a hotel it's a mutually-beneficial, time-limited arrangement with all parameters amically agreed in advance. I book to stay for a specified period of time, after which I check out in an orderly and timely manner. I do not suddenly jump ship half way through my stay, leaving the hotel in the lurch, expecting them to handle all the losses they incur by my suddenly vacating my room. I should not expect to be able to leave paying nothing towards the previously-agreed part of my stay that I've welched on. Yes I know that there is no agreed time factor in the agreement regarding our EU membership. But, by suddenly deciding to leave, we are dumping on them. Not as much as we seem to think. But they are well within their rights to charge us a hefty fee for leaving. And we need to be humble and we ought to hear what they say and be extremely polite about any efforts to reduce the sum. Any other attitude to the situation would be us thinking Queen/Empire/who won the bloody war anyway/we're the dog's dangly bits and who are these Johnny Foreigners demanding money off of us. Not only that, the attitude would result in an adverse outcome for us. Davis and his motley bunch of hubris-laden little Englanders have got a lot to learn. At the moment they are being laughed at and pissed on, deservedly. Be honest and drop the Colonel Blimp shite. Once we leave, which I hope we never will, we'll soon find out what small fry we really are in this big wide world of ours. Actually, it may do us good. But I'd rather be where we are. I like the hotel, in spite of the ants in the bedroom and the skidmarks on the towels. It's warm and cosy and the view is to die for. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Nigel Parsons Date: 09 Sep 17 - 04:55 PM Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: SPB-Cooperator - PM Date: 09 Sep 17 - 04:16 PM Of course there are some who believe that UK should have the right to focus on its own economy at the expense of others, and these are the lowest of the low pathetic excuses for human existance.The sooner this country has its holier than thou arrogance wiped of its face, the better. These are often the same people who resent paying taxes as they earn enough not to need anything from the state. Of course, there's always the opportunity to base arguments on facts (annoying as that may be) As far as charitable giving is concerned, the UK comes out top in Europe. According to The CAF world giving index 2016 Not bad for a country of heartless self-serving bastards, is it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Big Al Whittle Date: 09 Sep 17 - 05:07 PM No I'd say that was a pretty standard remainer view. fuelled by hatred of the excesses of the empire, and guilt for it. a generation who grew up in a country with virtually no industry or understanding of it cultural importance in our society. the endless jibes of being a little Englander ......based on the lack of understanding of the history of our country - because it is no longer taught in any depth. basically we've been tied to a gang of countries who look round and say ...nothing to with me guv when shit happens. perhaps because of our imperial past - we know that's not always an option. our interventions have not always been well conceived - but at least they were performed by people who had to face the music at the ballot box. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: akenaton Date: 09 Sep 17 - 05:10 PM "Of course there are some who believe that UK should have the right to focus on its own economy at the expense of others" :0) Isn't that exactly what has been happening under the auspices of the EU's "freedom of movement" policy? Rich countries exploiting poorer ones as part of an economic policy which disregards social consequences. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Backwoodsman Date: 09 Sep 17 - 05:38 PM Just seen a comment on FB by a BrexShit supporter claiming that long waits for appointments to see your doctor are the result of our membership of the EU. To think that we're being driven by these shit-for-brains twats towards the cliff-edge and on to disaster. God help us. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 09 Sep 17 - 05:50 PM There is a world of difference between levelling the playing field and charity, especially where our history has contributed to the inequality. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Iains Date: 10 Sep 17 - 03:30 AM A toon for the Remoaners! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_pUgkECn9s |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Big Al Whittle Date: 10 Sep 17 - 03:47 AM well john, i've heard shit for brains remainers say that they wouldn't be allowed to go foreign holidays after brexit. if all you listen to are the shit for brains people - well its up to you to choose your company. god keep you in that mind, as richard 111's henchman said before delivering the blow to poor old duke of something or other. brexit is clearly in trouble. no political party believes in it. its being delivered by people who don't understand it. i lived on a sump estate for over thirty years. my disabled wife was terrorised whilst i was out working by feral youths. in living memory those kids would have been at work in apprenticeships, learning how to conduct themselves as men, by the models of manhood and dignity that working for a living confers on most men. the jobs started disappearing abroad almost as soon as we joined the common market. that's why ordinary people hate the EU. it took away our culture, and replaced it with examples of 'loadsamoney' spivs. the only people who seemed to well post '74. its the people who hate the EU - not the politicians. THey don't see it. THeir snouts are in the trough. You can sneer at the Brexshitters, I've watched your posts for months with their words of hatred and contempt for Brexshitters. Your inability to understand ordinary people and the way and the reasons they voted does you no credit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: The Sandman Date: 10 Sep 17 - 03:52 AM could the Tories want to deliberately lose the election?to leave a decision "Brexit",[ which appears to be an political gamble whose possible consequences do not appear to have been thought through,and which the uk political establishment and civil service seem to be unprepared for, left to some other party to sort out, an abdication of responsibilties. before any decision was made the civil service and the political establishment should have been prepared for the consequences of a leave vote. the conservative leadership at the time were irresponsible because they took a political gamble whilst being unprepared for the political consequences, it would not surprise me at all if they elected rees mogg and lost and deliberately abdicated responsibilty, so that another party had to deal with their gamble and lack of foresight. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 10 Sep 17 - 03:56 AM Steve, my "silly and tedious" metaphor stands. When you check out of a hotel, you do not make offers until they accept one, you are presented with a bill then you check it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: The Sandman Date: 10 Sep 17 - 03:56 AM I agree with Al, a LOT OFPEOPLE are disenchanted with the EU, a small majority. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Stu Date: 10 Sep 17 - 04:32 AM "Your inability to understand ordinary people and the way and the reasons they voted does you no credit." As does your inability to understand the 48% of ordinary people who voted to stay in the EU, any of whom were working class Labour voters who could see beyond the lies and deceit of the Brexiteers. Brexit is simply the spilling over of tory infighting over Europe for the past 40 years that was foisted on the people by the same feckless toffs that are now fucking up the negotiations with their chaotic and belligerent approach to our friends and neighbours. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 10 Sep 17 - 04:34 AM They are not behaving like friends and neighbours. They seem determined to give us a bad deal even if it hurts them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Backwoodsman Date: 10 Sep 17 - 04:38 AM No, Al. We've been through this before, British industry was struggling before we joined the EU, don't tell me it wasn't - unlike you, I was actually working in Engineering in the '60s and '70s, first as an apprentice, and later in the admin and management of two companies, and we could all see what was coming because of complacency and failure to invest. Thatcher, not the EU, decided to destroy the unions, and part of her tactics was to change the UK's economy from one based on manufacturing and production with (where the real strength of the unions lay), to a service-based economy, where unions were comparatively weak. She was very successful in that policy, and subsequent governments did little or nothing to reverse it. I get very tired of hearing about how you were brought up on a...yadda yadda yadda. I'm also the son of working-class parents who had fuck-all, lived on council estates until I was thirty, left school at 16 and went into an apprenticeship. My experience, working for forty-nine years in both manufacturing and service industries, is that the EU brought much good into the lives of ordinary, working people and the businesses they worked for - employment protection legislation, minimum wage, compulsory minimum holiday rights, health and safety, human rights, simplified rules and standardised tax-regimes for the movement of goods, just to name a few. Do you really believe that we would have had the same if it had been left to UK governments? They are already talking about 'deregulating' the employment market, and we haven't even left the EU yet for god's sake! I'll grant that the EU hasn't always got everything right, but it's got a lot right. You're doing the same thing that so many BrexShitters have done - linking home-grown problems to the EU. It's precisely what the small cadre of mega-wealthy families and individuals who will massively benefit financially from, and are driving, BrexShit want, and it's the propaganda that their mouthpieces, the Sun, the Daily Mail, the Express, and the Telegraph, have preached in order to convert sufficient people to get the 'Leave' vote carried. I've been told on several occasions by BrexShitters that, by virtue of voting 'Remain', I'm a 'Traitor' who, at best, should be 'deported and forced to live in the EU' or, at worst, should be 'arrested, marched out, and shot'. This, from people who proudly proclaim that they 'voted to restore democracy' in our country. The irony would be hilarious if it wasn't so tragic. Nice people you're associating yourself with. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Stu Date: 10 Sep 17 - 04:53 AM "They seem determined to give us a bad deal even if it hurts them." Ah, the British sense of entitlement. Born of a misplaced sense of superiority to Johnny Foreigner. Poor loves. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Steve Shaw Date: 10 Sep 17 - 05:15 AM Giving us "a good deal" will hurt the EU more, if by '"good deal" you mean giving good old Blighty indulgences and privileges that only members get, just because we're good old Blighty and think we're a bit special. If that happens there will be perfectly justifiable outrage among the 27 which would do a lot of damage. Our economic growth is the weakest of the G7 and less than half that of the Eurozone. By the time the moment of truth arrives in 2019 we'll be a basket case and our leaving may actually benefit the EU. We are not special, and the sooner we realise it and drop the hubris the better. "They" are not "determined to give us a bad deal." "They" simply don't see why we should be allowed sneaky little privileges that are outside of the rule book. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Teribus Date: 10 Sep 17 - 07:06 AM Steve Shaw - 09 Sep 17 - 04:43 PM 1: "Keith, your silly, tedious hotel metaphor doesn't hold water, so do us a favour and give it up, will you." Well Shaw, Keith's "tedious metaphor" is a damned sight more relevant than your gas storage tank one for a start. 2: "When I book into a hotel it's a mutually-beneficial, time-limited arrangement with all parameters amically agreed in advance. I book to stay for a specified period of time, after which I check out in an orderly and timely manner. I do not suddenly jump ship half way through my stay, leaving the hotel in the lurch, expecting them to handle all the losses they incur by my suddenly vacating my room." You book into your hotel and you indicate to them how long YOU THINK you will be staying - the only person to agree anything is YOU. YOU have accepted the hotel rates which are daily/nightly. They must accept the natural risks that your visit may be curtailed through no fault of anyone's and through circumstances completely out with your control. When you find yourself in the situation that you are forced to check-out early you pay for the accommodation and services that you have received - you do not pay for the remainder of the stay and the hotel cannot ask you to. The only thing they would be able to do would be if your, say, "two week" stay was at a preferential discounted rate and you only stayed three nights they would be perfectly entitled to charge you at their full fate for the three nights you stayed as you would not be entitled to the discounted rate for such a short stay. 3: "I should not expect to be able to leave paying nothing towards the previously-agreed part of my stay that I've welched on." Their risk all part and parcel of the business they are in. Tell me Shaw would you then expect a full refund if the hotel immediately finds an occupant for the room that you have prematurely vacated? There again you are probably basing your argument on "package holiday deals" - anyone taking advantage of these who does not take out insurance to protect themselves against the advent of having to fly home early is quite simply a mug. 4: "Yes I know that there is no agreed time factor in the agreement regarding our EU membership." This in effect blows your argument above to bits. You join a club, which is more or less what the EU is, you are perfectly entitled to resign your membership at any time YOU deem fit. You automatically surrender your "joining fee" and that year's subscription - that is all. 5: "But, by suddenly deciding to leave, we are dumping on them. Not as much as we seem to think. But they are well within their rights to charge us a hefty fee for leaving. And we need to be humble and we ought to hear what they say and be extremely polite about any efforts to reduce the sum." What was sudden? The referendum on Leaving or remaining has been on the cards since 2007. Now I make that nine years of discussions and opportunities for reform and change - all ignored by the EU. By the way I thought you and the other remoaners on this forum took the view that in leaving the EU we are dumping on ourselves? They are only well within their rights to charge what they believe we actually owe and they must quantify and justify that figure, in that same vein we are entitled to our share of common assets that we have contributed towards and WE must quantify and justify that figure. In both cases the final outcome is one of consent of both parties - they must be mutually agreed - it most certainly IS NOT their right to dictate terms to us, as you seem to suggest. 6: "Any other attitude to the situation would be us thinking Queen/Empire/who won the bloody war anyway/we're the dog's dangly bits and who are these Johnny Foreigners demanding money off of us. Not only that, the attitude would result in an adverse outcome for us. Davis and his motley bunch of hubris-laden little Englanders have got a lot to learn. At the moment they are being laughed at and pissed on, deservedly. Be honest and drop the Colonel Blimp shite." Good heavens Shaw!! Is that you introducing hubris-laden "Little-Englander" shite?? Article 50 has been triggered Shaw - Forget your hopes - WE ARE LEAVING THE EU. The economy of the United Kingdom is the fifth-largest national economy in the world measured by nominal gross domestic product (GDP), ninth-largest measured by purchasing power parity (PPP), and nineteenth-largest measured by GDP per capita, comprising 3.7% of world GDP. It is the second-largest economy in the European Union by both metrics. Hardly small fry Shaw. For someone who claims to be as widely travelled as yourself Shaw, I would have thought that by now you would have discovered what the bidet in the bathroom was for - enjoy your ants, skidmarks and view while ye may. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 10 Sep 17 - 08:25 AM Stu, Ah, the British sense of entitlement. Born of a misplaced sense of superiority to Johnny Foreigner. Poor loves. No entitlement. Neither are the EU are entitled to demand money without justifying it. No superiority. We want to remain friends and good neighbours if they will let us, trading freely if they will let us. We just want to be politically independent like every other non-EU country in the world. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Stu Date: 10 Sep 17 - 08:47 AM We were politically independent before. When was the last time any of us voted for a representative in another country? Brits love blame others for their own failings, and in this case they're blaming Europe. Soon we'll all be left to the devices of bunch of nasty tories who are exploiting the opportunity to grab more power for the government by bypassing parliament. Brexiteers have enabled this slight of hand which will eventually put power back where the tories want it: with the establishment. Wait until the Brexiteers whine and whinge in years to come that their crap country is on it's uppers; rest assured they'll blame anyone but themselves for their own myopia and igornance. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Iains Date: 10 Sep 17 - 09:04 AM The referendum was a vote to remain a part of, or leave the EU. The Majority said leave. If we have any sort of democracy then we will leave. Hurling insults and denigrating those that voted to leave changes nothing. It merely confirms that the socialist remoaners cannot accept that they are outnumbered, outvoted, and even more aggravating for them, totally irrelevant. They cannot even accept the results without squealing "unfair" When will the remoaners start blaming the weather on Brexit? They appear to have the same knowledge of reality as they do of english grammar and spelling. One word sums them all up-PATHETIC!!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Stu Date: 10 Sep 17 - 09:10 AM "Hurling insults and denigrating those that voted to leave changes nothing" Why? Because we refuse to get on board with your sad little project? I'll continue to work toward maintaining a way of life you are intent on taking from us. We're leaving for sure, but the way we're leaving isn't settled and I'll be damned if a bunch of nasty old white people who had it lucky when they were growing up are going to tell me what to believe. Ugh. "remoaners" Hyp-----o------crite. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: MikeL2 Date: 10 Sep 17 - 09:12 AM Hi Steve Did you watch the match ?<" I predict Blues 1 Reds 3. "> Your prediction was slightly astray.!!!! I was at the game and I wanted Liverpool to win against City. I hope this was just a blip for Liverpool because on yesterday's performance the defence had more holes than a colander. De Bruyne (sic) had the pitch to himself. It was an unfortunate that they got red-carded - the foul looked viscious to me > But having seen it again on TV I think it was accidental, However kicking a man in the face is a sending-off in my book. I got home in time to watch the United v Stoke game. It could have gone either way but a draw was a fair result. One unusual thing to happen in these days. Not even one Yellow card was awarded. Cheers Mike |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Steve Shaw Date: 10 Sep 17 - 09:38 AM It was a 50-50 ball and Mané was going for the ball. His foot was high but it was a definite yellow. Never a red card. The Sky commentators all agreed that the referee was probably under orders to give reds for those offences where the clearly-injured player hits the ground like a stone, but that should never be the deciding factor, always simply the nature of the actual foul. The ref clearly didn't want to give the red but he felt under pressure. It was a total game-changer of a decision, ruining the match. Mané, Firmino and Salah were constant menaces in the first half, and that decision completely knocked the stuffing out of them. Even De Bruyne said the decision was wrong, as did all the Match Of The Day panel, all ex-strikers who all said they would have gone for the ball too. Rotten decisions are not only unfair to the players but also for the fans who saw a game that was turning into the spectacle they expected and paid to see completely ruined. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: akenaton Date: 10 Sep 17 - 10:07 AM If you guys want to talk about football, why not open a new thread, or do so by PM? This thread was instigated to discuss Brexit and some deviation is expected, but not a subject COMPLETELY unconnected. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Jim Carroll Date: 10 Sep 17 - 10:11 AM If yoyu want to discus this subject Ake, please do so rather than your insulting one or two liners That is not discussing - it is simply trolling Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Stu Date: 10 Sep 17 - 10:34 AM "...but not a subject COMPLETELY unconnected" Of course it's connected. If they qualify all football teams want to stay in Europe... *boom-tish* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Steve Shaw Date: 10 Sep 17 - 10:54 AM I was talking to Mike, akenaton. Mind your own business. And the members of this forum decide what goes into threads, not just you. Now just mogg off, why don't you. Hey, "mogg off." I like it! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: akenaton Date: 10 Sep 17 - 10:59 AM Well please yourselves, but abruptly changing the subject in a debate or discussion is usually a sign of defeat. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Stanron Date: 10 Sep 17 - 11:02 AM Perhaps the remoaners are talking about football because, once again, they are loosing the arguement about Brexit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Dave the Gnome Date: 10 Sep 17 - 11:11 AM Jesus wept. Not another who thinks that these threads are to be won or lost. They aren't. This is not a debate. If you want to debate, go to a proper debating forum with proper rules and winners determined by an independent panel. All you are doing in here is mass debating... DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: akenaton Date: 10 Sep 17 - 11:53 AM One can "lose the argument" in a discussion, especially the discussions which are entered into here. Thread drift can and does happen, but to start wittering on about a subject with no connection to the thread is at least bad manners? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Nigel Parsons Date: 10 Sep 17 - 12:04 PM From: akenaton - PM Date: 10 Sep 17 - 11:53 AM To start wittering on about a subject with no connection to the thread is at least bad manners? Ah! Bad Manners More thread drift, and trying to turn this into a music thread? Cheers ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Jim Carroll Date: 10 Sep 17 - 01:27 PM "One can "lose the argument" in a discussion," Only when your reason for being here is to win competitions you, keith and teribus are the only ones who persistently do so Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Stu Date: 10 Sep 17 - 02:41 PM "Perhaps the remoaners are talking about football because, once again, they are loosing the arguement about Brexit." Aw, no need to be like that. They'll reintroduce birching the poor, dog fighting, badger baiting, poking the unemployed with sharp sticks, otter hunting, beating up brown and black people, queer-bashing and hanging poachers once we leave the EU and as they're sports you like, you can talk about them can't you? There y'go. Soon it'll be just like the old days. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: MikeL2 Date: 10 Sep 17 - 02:44 PM Hi Steve I agree with much of what you said. However " going for the ball" and missing it is usually ( not always ) given as a foul. I agree there was no intention to foul but he got it wrong and kicked the keeper in the face. The game was held up for nine minutes because of the goal keepers' condition. That is why the ref gave a red. You are correct in that the incident spoiled what was becoming a really good game. Cheers Mike |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: MikeL2 Date: 10 Sep 17 - 02:50 PM Hi Akaeton. I thought that thread drift is what the below the line thread all do. read this one for instance. MikeL2 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: akenaton Date: 10 Sep 17 - 03:31 PM Discussing football on a thread about politics is not "drift". What's wrong with the PM button, you seem to be an acquaintance of Steve's? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Steve Shaw Date: 10 Sep 17 - 05:06 PM Sod off and mind your own business, akenaton. But Mike, he sent him off straight away, not after eight minutes! Thing is, Edison was out of his area and couldn't use his hands, right? His only option was to use his head. It was a definite fifty-fifty, there was no malicious intent, Mané was watching the ball and, like any striker, he had the right to go for it. Yes his foot was high. So a yellow for that. Also, just think - had Mané been half a yard quicker, he would have got the ball, which was his one and only intention, Edison would have clattered into him and Edison would have been sent off for denying a clear goal-scoring opportunity. It was a sporting moment between two incredlibly committed and talented players, not an act of war. The ref bloody ruined the match without good reason. What was turning into a great match was wrecked by a moment of sheer refereeing stupidity. Not fair on the players, not fair on the supporters who pay good money to see the greatest players in an exciting, evenly-matched contest at the highest level. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: akenaton Date: 10 Sep 17 - 06:05 PM Do any of the other members involved in this discussion think that this departure from the subject is anything other than a tactic to derail the thread? We expect bad manner in discussion with Steve, but usually his sneers and insult are in some way connected to the discussion. I know nothing of Mike, but he and Steve are obviously friends and this intervention is incongruous in the extreme, to presume that it just happened out of the blue is beyond belief. It is also extremely insulting to those wishing to conduct a serious exchange of views. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Iains Date: 10 Sep 17 - 06:18 PM Such a polite little fellow. The brexit controversy is becoming a little too taxing for him. But the boring babbling about weeds has changed to football. I prefer croquet, Jaques of London, the oldest games manufacturers in the world, first wrote down the rules of croquet. The game is a race around a circuit of hoops. The Blue and Black balls play against the Red and Yellow balls. The first side to get both of their balls through the 12 hoops in order and hit the peg is the winner. Once a ball has completed the circuit and hit the peg (is pegged out) it is removed from the game. When the striker's ball has been through the last hoop it is known as a rover. It can then score a peg point by striking the peg (pegging out) and be removed from the game. It may also cause another's rover to be pegged out. Jaques of London also invented ping pong and Happy Families. A fascinating game of skill and discernment.Croquet became highly popular as a social pastime in England during the 1860s. It was enthusiastically adopted and promoted by the Earl of Essex who held lavish croquet parties at Cassiobury House, his stately home in Watford, Hertfordshire, and the Earl even launched his own Cassiobury brand croquet set. By 1867, Jaques had printed 65,000 copies of his Laws and Regulations of the game. It quickly spread to other Anglophone countries, including Australia, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, and the United States. No doubt one of the attractions was that the game could be played by both sexes; this also ensured a certain amount of adverse comment. By the late 1870s, however, croquet had been eclipsed by another fashionable game, tennis, and many of the newly created croquet clubs, including the All England club at Wimbledon, converted some or all of their lawns into tennis courts. There was a revival in the 1890s, but from then onwards, croquet was always a minority sport, with national individual participation amounting to a few thousand players. The All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club still has a croquet lawn, but has not hosted any significant tournaments. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters From: Jim Carroll Date: 10 Sep 17 - 07:29 PM "Do any of the other members involved in this discussion think that this departure from the subject is anything other than a tactic to derail the thread?" You don't take part in discussions Ake - you post hate mail - Muslims, homosexuals -Liberals - members of this forum All targets for your vitriol Can you actually point out where you have ever taken part in an exchange of ideas rather than a vomit of vitriolic abuse? Your runnimg mate seems quite happy to discuss sport (if you can desctibe croquet as sport) so your own side appears to have abandoned you Jim Carroll |