Brexit #2

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Mossback
Date: 13 Dec 18 - 08:18 PM

Sorry Greg but a majority of the voters decided the issue.

Yup.

Just like a "majority" of voters put that piece of dirt Trump in the White House.

You SHOULD be sorry.

"Fred"

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: robomatic
Date: 13 Dec 18 - 08:39 PM

I was just looking up the difference between a referendum and a plebiscite. According to the internet, a referendum is a yes or no decision to be voted on by all citizens legally empowered to vote. The result is binding. A plebiscite is a yes or no decision to be voted on by all citizens legally empowered to vote. The result is not binding.
I was under the impression that the Brexit vote two years ago was non-binding, although the Government treated it as binding and this began the laborious unhappy process that has led us to the present situation.

. . .
Okay, now I've looked it up in Wikipedia, which has an excellent article on just the matters I'm concerned with. It's a bit more complicated than what I wrote above.

Could the government put together a multiple choice referendum which would put to the electorate the primary choices they have before them. That vote would be decidedly final and take it out of the hands of the politicians who seem to be unpopular no matter which direction the country is to go. If the outcomes can be put in simple understandable terms, why not have the public in a situation where there is no one to blame but themselves. After all a referendum is what got us here.

Then vote for the politicians the electorate thinks can best execute the referendum choice. As usual.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: bobad
Date: 13 Dec 18 - 09:14 PM

A question of such national import should require a 2/3 majority at least, IMO. Barring that, in the case of a yes vote, a second vote on the exit details should be required. But of course, these requirements would have to have been established prior to the vote. As it stands it is incumbent that the results of the vote, such as it was, be accepted as representing the will of the voters.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Dec 18 - 09:35 PM

The government could of course put together a multi-choice referendum, or a two stage one. But they've no intention of doing so. And they'd need to get legislation to do it through parliament, which might be difficult.

I can see them going round in circles right up until the end of March. At that point, with No Deal imminent, given that there is so wide opposition to No Deal in the Commons, I can imagine a majority vote by MPs to cancel Article 50, and to hold a referendum to approve or overturn that, with Remain or No Deal Exit as the options.
...........

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Dec 18 - 09:43 PM

Or, to be embarrassingly more accurate, the will of 38% of the electorate. Setting aside the fact that referendums are extremely undemocratic (Jesus might agree with me whereas Barabbas wouldn't), a move to change the fundamental status quo in a nation requires the bar to be set very high indeed. We've been a member of the EU for almost half a century, during which time we've enjoyed prosperity, security and peace in Europe. Unarguable. Cameron's 50-50 vote was extremely skewed. A vote to leave, shattering the status quo, was virtually irreversible once the assumed mandate had been carried out (until it is, I suppose there's hope). A vote to remain would have been challenged again and again for decades and would have been easy and cheap to reverse. That simply can't be right.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Dec 18 - 09:59 PM

Nigel Farage in fact said while the result was being awaited that, if the Remainers won, as he thought likely, the struggle to reverse that would begin immediately. And he'd have been quite entitled to do that.

I've been trying to think of any other choice we make in our lives which eliminates any chance of changing our mind. Apart from something like jumping off a roof.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Neil D
Date: 13 Dec 18 - 10:53 PM

There has been little coverage of the confidence vote here in the U S with the sentencing of Trump's lawyer to 3 yrs sucking up all the news time, but I did learn that May survived. I've been reading this thread and other sources, and I think I'm beginning to understand where things stand at present. The conflict between hard and soft Brexiteers is dividing the conservatives, while Labour/Liberal are hoping for the situation to deteriorate to the point where they get a redo on the original Brexit vote. I'm sure this is a broad brush understanding, lacking much in the way of nuance, but that's where I'm at.
   In the original Brexit vote in 2016, Scotland voted 63% to remain and Northern Ireland 56%. England (51%) and Wales (52%) voted leave. Exiting the EU was very unpopular in S and NI, presumably because of the predicted negative economic impact on those countries, but the much larger population of England made it's vote the only one that mattered. This had to seem like a real kick in the teeth to the Scots coming less than 2 years after they themselves were begged not to leave the UK, and capitulated. In the wake of the Brexit vote 2 years ago, there was a lot of talk that Scotland would hold a new referendum. Some, JP Morgan analysts for example, predicted that Scotland would be long gone from UK before Brexit could be achieved, while others said the Scottish economy was too weak at the time to consider leaving (the UK). There was also some speculation that the EU wasn't that enthused about accepting an independent Scotland, especially member nations with their own separatist movements. Think Spain.
    So. Where does that stand now? Obviously, 2 years on, Scotland is still part of the UK, so has independence been shelved for now? Might it be taken up later, even after Brexit? And what about Northern Ireland? Could they be allowed to have their own independence referendum? NI independence would certainly solve the backstop issue. Or is leaving the UK something the majority in NI would NEVER consider for fear of being absorbed by the Republic of Ireland?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 03:36 AM

There seems to be great confusion between the terms "democracy" and "populism"
AS somebody has pointed out Trump was elected 'democratically', moved the nuclear clock forward a couple of notches and put the Klan back on the American Streets
Similar things have happened in Britain after Brexit (substitute Tommy Robinson for The Klan)
Hitler was put into power democratically, plunged the world into war and chalked up six million hits for his democratic cause
Some here need to examine their own consciences when they espouse certain causes and fling about certain accusations Bobad
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 04:11 AM

There seems to be great confusion between the terms "democracy" and "populism"

Democracy:a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.

Populism: A political approach that strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups. 'In the context of electoral politics as practiced there, populism is attractive to politicians of all shades.'

The two could not be more different. There may be confusion in your mind but that would surprise few here.

As yet democracy is unsurpassed as a means of government. Very little point in criticising it unless you have a viable alternative.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 04:23 AM

Populism is the cynical use of people's prejudices to gain decisions that otherwise would have been unobtainable
Hitler chose the Jews, Farage chose immigration
A recent example of the use of Populism when a no-hoper candidate in the Irish Presidential election targeted Travelers and the lesser well of and shot his expectations from virtually nothing to 22% of the vote
Trump appealed to the Redneck States
None of this has the slightest thing to do with democracy - it's about diverting the attention away from the main problems of society and scapegoating the weakest

It is reckoned that there is a Nigel Farage in most of the European countries now - hence the rise of fascism
The "Democratic States" have made sure there is no alternative system as yet - America chose napalm and Agent Orange
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 05:02 AM

Populism means never having to say sorry - to borrow an old caption
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 05:02 AM

Populism is the cynical use of people's prejudices to gain decisions that otherwise would have been unobtainable.
Short answer: Rubbish
Long answer: RUBBISH

Most people base decisions on how they understand the situation, and what they need to do to change it. That is why the majority voted for brexit. They no longer wished to remain in the EU.
Your feeble attempts to undermine that decision by an increasingly strident pack of lies will never alter that reality. Calling them stupid, recist, bigoted, little englanders and all the other crap you hurl about with gay abandon does not change the majority position to leave.
Roll on 11pm UK time on Friday, 29 March 2019.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 05:15 AM

I far prefer your take on populism to Iains', Jim.

"Democracy:a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives."

Sure. Except that you've indicated repeatedly that you don't believe in it. You've called the 48% who voted remain losers who should stop moaning and trying to overturn what you regard incorrectly as a democratic decision, and you've said that the 28% of the electorate who didn't vote (even though they still pay their taxes, etc) are feckless and undeserving can't-be-bothereds whose opinions don't count and who don't deserve to have any say. Your brand of "democracy" is for winners only and the rest can go hang. And in the next breath you defend the populism that brought us Trump and Farage. I suppose you're going to tell us next what a great leader Boris would be.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 05:20 AM

"Roll on 11pm UK time on Friday, 29 March 2019."

Yup. And there's a nice little bit of irony that has gone over your head. The moment of our leaving is actually midnight.

EU time. Heheh.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 05:52 AM

Actually, it's incorrect to consider democracy and populism as comparable. Democracy is an agreed system of government whereas populism is merely a campaigning mechanism, generally intended to over-simplify and appeal to people's basest instincts and prejudices. Obsessively demonising your opponents, sloganising (e.g. that bus and the Farage poster) and mantras (e.g. "fake news," "make America great again") and a rabble-rousing gutter press are the main tools of populism. Populism degrades democracy by riding on its back. That's precisely how Nazi Germany proceeded. We should be very watchful.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 05:58 AM

"Short answer: Rubbish
Long answer: RUBBISH"
As ever, your non-response certainly is
Only a megalomaniac would claim to speak on behalf of "most of the people" by saying what they think
Most of the British people did not vote for Britain to leave - only a small minority of those who voted did, and you and your "democratic" democrats are not willing to let any of the British people vote on what are the probable consequences of leaving, none of which was apparent when the vote took place - but that's right-wing democracy for you

Nice summing up on the Parliamentary shenanigans from this morning's Irish Times


CONFIDENCE VOTE HAS WEAKENED BOTH MAY AND BREXIT HARDLINERS        
Denis Staunnton, London Letter


As the smoke cleared around Westminster after Wednesday’s confidence vote in Theresa May, it became clear that the exercise had weak¬ened both the prime minister and the hardline Brexiteers who tried to bring her down. May’s acknowledgment that she cannot lead her party into the next general election was a statement of the obvious since few expected her to survive long beyond March 29th next year when Britain leaves theEU.
But by stating publicly that she has a sell-by date, she has given potential successors licence to campaign openly within the party and rendered herself a lame duck whose authority diminishes every day. And although she survived Wednesday’s vote, more than a third of her parliamentary party has no confidence in her leadership.
The prime minister’s assertion that a Brexit deal must have the support of the DUP if it is to win parliamenta¬ry approval reflects a belief in Downing Street that the DUP holds the key to reconciliation with hardline Brexiteers in the Conservative party. If May can negotiate changes to the terms of the backstop that satisfy the DUP, the theory goes, Conservative Brexiteers will have sufficient cover to fall into line behind it.

BACKSTOP CONCESSIONS
There are two problems with this strategy: nothing the EU would consider conceding on the backstop is likely to be sufficient to win over the DUP; and there is no evidence that the hardline Brexiteers are seeking an excuse to back the prime minister’s deal.
May’s would-be assassins emerged snarling into the morning on Thursday, with Dominic Raab suggesting that since they had failed to force her out of office she should now resign voluntarily.
“We will have to back her as best we can but the problem is that both in relation to Brexit and the wider sustainability of the government given the likelihood of any changes to the deal, given the likely scale of opposition it looks very difficult to see how this prime minister can lead us forward,” he said.
The Brexiteers had one shot at removing May from Downing Street before the end of the Brexit negotiations and they have blown it. She may be a lame duck but she is immune from a leadership challenge for 12 months.
The confidence vote further weakened the hardlin¬ers by revealing the limits of support in Parliament for a no-deal Brexit. Even if all 117 MPs who voted against the prime minister would also back a no-deal Brexit (a dubious assumption) they account for just over a fifth of the membership of the House of Commons.
May’s former policy adviser predicted on Thursday that she would have to bring her Brexit deal before the Com¬mons a number of times before it is approved.
“I think there will be at least one if not two or three defeats before opposition MPs and Conservative MPs start to realise that they’ve done their signalling and now it’s real. One of the reasons I think it’s important that the prime minister stayed is that whoever leads through this, I think, will be finished by it,” he said.

Legally binding
But unless the EU agrees to a legally binding text that renders the backstop inopera¬ble, neither the DUP nor Conservative Brexiteers are likely to support it. MPs will be able to introduce amend¬ments to the motion on the Brexit deal, telling the prime minister what course they want her to take.
Some ministers suggest¬ed at last week’s cabinet meeting that MPs should have an indicative vote to test support for various options on Brexit. If the House, as expected, rejects the idea of leaving the EU without a deal and it also rejects May’s deal, two options remain.

‘NORWAY PLUS'
One is "Norway plus' which would see Britain leave the EU but remain in the single market and the customs union, and the other is a second referendum. Support for “Norway plus” has evapo¬rated in recent weeks as former supporters grow confident that they could get a chance to reverse Brexit in a second referendum.
There may not be a majority in Parliament for a second referendum now but support is likely to grow as other options fall away.
And if May’s deal is rejected, she could be faced with a choice between a no-deal Brexit an sending the decision back to the people

Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 06:03 AM

A reasonable definition of RIGHT WING POPULISM, which is what is under discussion here
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 06:47 AM

You can call it populism if you wish. You merely use it as a stick to beat brexiteers with by constructing a case they voted leave for all the wrong reasons.
The sad reality today is that the political system in the UK is broken. The MPs of both parties are split between brexiteers and remainers and the tories have constructed a slow train wreck of our departure.
Even clot corbyn cannot make up his mind, otherwise why has he not called for a no confidencein the government?

This situation makes the outcome of the confidence vote for May a very precarious creature. Backbenchers largely voted for her to be ditched and whips have less control on the back benches. This struggle is by no means resolved, especially after her humiliation yesterday.
We are now in stormy seas in uncharted waters, while both parties rearrange deckchairs on the ship of state Titanic.

Hell is empty and all the devils are here.
William Shakespeare

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 06:58 AM

You can deny all you like, unless you come up with an alternative, that is what populism is and how it is now being used
Yours, and the goose-steppers in Britan who share your views take on democracy appears to be only that which they agree with - living proof is the baying of the rabid right that, despite having wone a parliamentary vote May should resign
You really can't get a clearer indication of how they/you regard democracy than that

The only way of Britain getting out of this appaling mess with a shered of decency is to put the vote to the people again and ask them is this what they actually voted for
Not one of you "'democrats' have explained why another vote should not take place - that's a pretty clear indication that you regard democracy as your own personal view put into action
Such views have caused wars and filled extermination camps in the past are are quite likely to do so again if allowed to
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 07:07 AM

"Even clot corbyn cannot make up his mind, otherwise why has he not called for a no confidencein the government?"

Because Mr Corbyn is a very intelligent and astute politician, who realises that BrexShit is a poison-chalice that's seen off one PM, effectively currently seeing off a second PM, and seen off numerous BrexShit ministers and other sundry Cabinet members, and that to call for a no-confidence vote could result in the Labour Party in general, and himself in particular, drinking from it.

Your fuck-witted Tory Toffs landed the country in this steaming pile of ordure - I'm sure that Mr Corbyn's attitude is, "Let those whose arrogance and jaw-dropping selfishness dropped us in the shit pull us out of it".

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 07:35 AM

7 Euros for a visa, sounds cheap enough to me.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 08:04 AM

Not all Brexiteers are 'populists'. Some are older people brought up to believe in the greatness of Britain and its empire, and the superiority of the British/English and they believe this is somehow lost while we are in Europe. I had a lecture from one such yesterday about how in world war two there was no bug ridden housing in England as there were regulations and such places would have been closed down. According to the same person there was not poverty in Victorian England and the industrialists looked after their workmen like their own children. Domestic servants were never badly treated but were like one of the family. Appalling and depressing junk but not what you might call 'populists'.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 08:10 AM

Because Mr Corbyn is a very intelligent and astute politician,

When was your last visit to specsavers?

A question for remainers.
If the clear mandate of the first referendum is betrayed by calling for a second one, what on earth gives you the confidence the outcome of a second, third, or fourth referendum would be honoured?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 08:23 AM

"Some are older people brought up to believe in the greatness of Britain and its empire...."
These are the targets of populism K, not the instigators
The system I was educated under taught us everything you describe - we even sang hymns which proudly declared that to be foreign was to be - "In error's chain"
I had family and immediate friends to counteract what I was being taught in school and I was encouraged to find out for myself
Passive racism is rampant in Britain - a survey a few years ago suggested that one third of the British people held racist views and had openly stated them - but up to now, that's as far as it goes

The only openly public demonstration of racism, other than that of the racist parties, was when the East End dockers marched in support of Enoch Powell's 'Rivers of Blood' speech it was generally ignored and Powell was kicked out of his party as an embarrassment (even to the right)
I fear thisngs are changing; Brexit was pushed through as POWELL'S DREAM BROUGHT TO FRUITION
Not a Britain I'd hoped our children would inherit
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 08:56 AM

Farage's poster with (in)appropriate spin put on it by the lefty rag, the gruniard.
"This picture, filled with nonwhite faces, makes explicit the racism in Ukip’s vision of leaving the European Union"
Yeah right!
Predominantly young unemployed Moslem males.

Now let us cut to the chase. In the land of the free and unfettered of the grand european union why did so many members of the borderless Schengen zone find it necessary to reintroduce border checks?
If you wish to tell a story, try fleshing out all aspects of it, not a carefully selected fragment. Your argument is false in every respect.
You are spreading false news as usual. Try reading guido and become educated!


The true story of border controls

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 09:01 AM

From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 05:20 AM
"Roll on 11pm UK time on Friday, 29 March 2019."
Yup. And there's a nice little bit of irony that has gone over your head. The moment of our leaving is actually midnight.
EU time. Heheh.

How is 'EU time' defined? The EU (even excluding UK) does not operate within a single time zone. Of course, if you meant CET (Central European Time) you would be correct.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 09:05 AM

The UK operates on GMT, Nigel. Not picked enough nits yet?

Sigh.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Stanron
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 10:14 AM

First thing I did was check the date of the Spring Equinox.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 10:30 AM

"arage's poster with (in)appropriate spin put on it by the lefty rag, the gruniard."
Outrage to this poster appeared in all the papers, including the Daily Mail and the Express
It would have been a credit to the left if they had been the only ones to pick it up, but it was so outrageously racist that they all did
More whataboutism again
Who on earth suggested that Europe is racist free ?
Stop making things up
The poster as racist and events immediately following Brexit showed it had the effect it was intended to have
You are the last person whose comments on racism are to be taken seriously given your own track record

"Predominantly young unemployed Moslem males."
Never realized the people in the poster were identified in any way - you are pretty consistent in your racist stereotyping, aren't you?
Your sole contribution to any discussion you take part in is to provide an example of what is happening to Britain and what is likely to happen - the only reason I (or, I presume, anybody) continues to respond to you (when they do)

"Try reading guido and become educated!"
It is pretty significant that you have no-one other than a criminal right wing blogger to rely on for 'information - a pretty clear indication that there is nobody else
Keep it coming
Good to know that thi is where you gain your education - it really does explain a lot
Jim Carroll

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-racism-religious-intolerance-united-nations-special-rapporteur-a8348021.html

https://discoversociety.org/2018/04/03/racism-work-brexit-empire/

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01419870.2017.1361544

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 11:07 AM

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 11:11 AM

The UK operates on GMT, Nigel. Not picked enough nits yet?

Sigh.

No, the UK operates on GMT for the present, but that is for the smaller part of the year. For approximately 7 months out of 12 it works on BST (British Summer Time)

I'll see your 'sigh' and raise you one.
Anyway, my comment was on what time zone(s) the EU works on.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 11:12 AM

SOME "LEFTIE" STATISTICS MORE

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 11:13 AM

Oh Dear! If jimmie read his own links he would know who the refugees were "The photograph shows refugees in Slovenia in 2015, many fleeing a murderous civil war in Syria."(Now Syria prides itself on religious tolerance but the dominant religion is Islam)
If you managesd to escape from your bog periodically you would be able to identify the people in the photograph as Middle Eastern by facial features and facial hair. Having lived and worked in swathes of the middle east over nearly 40 years such things are immediately apparent to me.
   If they were in gainful employment they would not be refugees ergo they are unemployed. Some of us can figure such things out. You apparently must be lead by the nose.
Not very good at this are you.


EU time. Heheh.

No such beast. The EU covers 3 time zones. You really do need to be more specific HeHehHeh

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 11:21 AM

A question of such national import should require a 2/3 majority at least, IMO. Barring that, in the case of a yes vote, a second vote on the exit details should be required. But of course, these requirements would have to have been established prior to the vote. As it stands it is incumbent that the results of the vote, such as it was, be accepted as representing the will of the voters.

Had we gone for a 2/3 majority first time, I would agree with you. But you seem to be saying that if there was a second referendum with say 62% for leave (when that vote is based on current information) that should not overturn on vote of 52% that was several years old (which was based on limited information and lies from both sides.) I would say that is a definite affront to democracy myself.   Having a 2/3 majority for such things make sense, but I don't think you can have different rules for what constitutes a majority for the two referendums.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 11:33 AM

Look we used to have a fishing industry all the way round our coast . Thousands of people employed/ We didn't run it very well but little fishing boats used to come over from France, and there was no hassle. We overfished our waters , the pink shrimp disappeated frpm our waters off Boston, where I lived. By the time I grew up Albert Gostelow had the last shrimping boat out of Boston.

After the EU, came the Spnish facrory boiats. We didn't know it, but they had emptied the seas of fish off their own coasts.

The Remainers sneer and say, we should have had the factory boats - we were too backward looking.

Forward looking would be if we restocked our waters - planned by marine biologists. We licnced fishing boats - so that only boats of a size that would fish a sustainable amount were allowed.

We can't be forward looking in the EU. They just want to satisfy everybody. To look after our own future - we need to think for ourselves. We can't possibly sort out all Europe's problems. Our own are difficult enough.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 11:34 AM

The People’s Vote’s luridly-coloured ‘Bollocks to Brexit’ bus has recently started its tour of the country, presumably to test out the theory of whether being as irritating as possible is a good way to win voters over.

From your media maestro GUIDO. Not only is the bus illegal but it regresses to the same gutter language as many remainiacs here. Call me old fashioned, but displaying such a sign in the streets, surrounded by impressionable children, is not a very clever thing to do.

I am sure Mrs Whtehouse would turn in her grave,.
Bad language coarsens the whole quality of our life. It normalises harsh, often indecent language, which despoils our communication.

    As quoted by Jonathan Brown in "Mary Whitehouse: To some a crank, to others a warrior",

https://order-order.com/2018/12/14/peoples-vote-driving-illegal-bollocks-brexit-bus/

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 11:38 AM

Not only is the bus illegal...


Is it? No one apart from Guido seems to claim it is.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 11:41 AM

"Oh Dear! If jimmie read his own links he would know who the refugees were "
I did - nwhere is the suggestion that they were "unemployed" and, unless they were in drag, I can spot a few women in there
The racist scare is that they are after our jobs and are a threat white women - racist stereotyping as old as The Windrush generation

You abusive attempts to talk down is a predictable sign that you have no decent responses to offer
Your mentor, Teribus, was bad enough (as has been shown of the last couple of days) but at least he got up off his arse and made an effort - - your postings are both unimaginative and lazy
And you clam to be an adept debater - in my hole you are
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 12:21 PM

Not only is the bus illegal...
Is it? No one apart from Guido seems to claim it is.

Go online and check it yourself.

No what else would you like to argue over?



under DVLA rules, it is “paramount that the information stored on the vehicle register is accurate and up to date… Any changes to the vehicles details must be notified to DVLA by law. By covering the entire vehicle in a coloured adhesive/vinyl wrap, it is DVLA’s view that the colour change should be recorded.”

However, a quick search on DVLA’s database reveals that the ‘Bollocks to Brexit’ bus is in fact registered as “white”, rather than “nauseating yellow”
I have checked it myself:

    Registration number FJ60 EGD
    Make VOLVO
    Colour WHITE

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 12:23 PM

Well, Nitnigpick, let me put it this way. In Germany, Spain, France, Portugal and Italy, a goodly selection of EU big beasts there, we leave on the stroke of THEIR midnight. Oh, and not forgetting Brussels, of course. Never mind. We can take back control at one minute past. Oh, except for that pesky backstop, if we need it. Oh, and except for the trading standards that China and the US can impose on us and shrug if we demur. Excelsior!

And Iains, there is one glaringly simple reason why Corbyn hasn't called for a no-confidence vote. The Tories would win it. For now they have the DUP reluctantly onside. Maybe Jezza is a little more canny than you think. But watch that space.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 12:28 PM

" nwhere is the suggestion that they were "unemployed"

how can you be both employed and a refugee?
I despair! debating with you is like discussing metaphysics with cotton wool.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 12:32 PM

Go online and check it yourself.

No what else would you like to argue over?

I am not arguing - asking is not arguing, you know. But yes, I did look online and Guido was the only one saying it was illegal.

The DVLA update on April 10, 2014 said that they wanted to be notified:
===
The register maintained by the driver and vehicle licensing agency (DVLA) essentially exists to assist in revenue collection, road safety and law enforcement. The Police and other enforcement agencies rely on the DVLA record for all vehicles-related investigations. It is therefore paramount that the information stored on the vehicle register is accurate and up to date.

By covering the entire vehicle in a coloured adhesive/vinyl wrap, it is DVLA’s view that the colour change should be recorded.

===

However, that is the DVLA's view that it should be recorded may or may not be sufficient for it to be illegal. I would not know, which was why I asked.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 12:36 PM

I did look online and Guido was the only one saying it was illegal

For the nit-pickers, that means - obviously - Guido was the only one I found saying that. There may be any number of others who did not show up in the search.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 12:40 PM

"how can you be both employed and a refugee?"
Perhaps you should read the text yourself

THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWS REFUGEES IN SLOVENIA IN 2015,

It's a ****** fake - they are not refugees coming into Britain
Britain is morally bound to take refugees - lying about who and where they are is utterly obscene racism of the inhumanly worst type, as is defending such behaviour
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 01:17 PM

And how many hours has it taken you to work out they were in Slovenia.
It was in the article you linked to
I gave the same information.
No person at any time said anything about the photograph showing people coming into Britain. Your splattering of red paint merely indicates you are incapable of following an argument. As Arthur Askey would say:
Wakey Wakey!
As usual you spout demented rubbish. lying about who and where they are is utterly obscene racism of the inhumanly worst type, as is defending such behaviour The only one lying here is little demented jimmie.
I asked earlier why the Schengen zone reintroduced border controls and had a deathly hush in response. Do you think it was to impede Father Christmas, or perhaps to keep tabs on migrants in order to sift genuine refugees from returning Isis members and terrorists.
You may like living in your lefty delusion of the fiction they all are innocent refugees, the rest of us are more aware of the potential hazards of uncontrolled immigration.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Raggytash
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 01:33 PM

So the country to being taken to hell in a hand cart by the Government, the Prime Minister is hanging on, just, and Iains thinks the MOST important topic is the colour of a bus.

My god we're in a real mess.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 01:41 PM

"And how many hours has it taken you to work out they were in Slovenia."
I was always aware that the poster was lying - which is the point
It is a fake representation of the refugee situation in Britain
The article, and many other similar have described the poster as an incitement to race hatred in order to push through a decisin that will almost certainly damage Britsin, which is what you are defending
Why am I not surprised
I poined out that what happens elsewhere has sfa to do with what happens in Britain
You lyingly suggested that I regarded what happens in Europe is perfect - the only lying here
THe poster was racist - it has been widely recognised as such
Why are you defending it (rhetorical question, of course)

Little Jimmie again - both insecure and unoriginal - something you lifted from Teribus
You really have nothing of your own to contribute - do you
Right or wrong, the contributors here offer their own thoughts without having to plagiarise them from elsewhere - Guido and Teribus - great sources to "learn from" eh what
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 01:41 PM

"And how many hours has it taken you to work out they were in Slovenia."
I was always aware that the poster was lying - which is the point
It is a fake representation of the refugee situation in Britain
The article, and many other similar have described the poster as an incitement to race hatred in order to push through a decisin that will almost certainly damage Britsin, which is what you are defending
Why am I not surprised
I poined out that what happens elsewhere has sfa to do with what happens in Britain
You lyingly suggested that I regarded what happens in Europe is perfect - the only lying here
THe poster was racist - it has been widely recognised as such
Why are you defending it (rhetorical question, of course)

Little Jimmie again - both insecure and unoriginal - something you lifted from Teribus
You really have nothing of your own to contribute - do you
Right or wrong, the contributors here offer their own thoughts without having to plagiarise them from elsewhere - Guido and Teribus - great sources to "learn from" eh what
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 01:42 PM

Jim - one more time, ignore the troll! He makes no attempt to discuss, he just insults and provokes. He's winding you up, and getting a hard-on from doing it. He's a worthless waste of oxygen. Ignore him, FFS!!

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Dec 18 - 01:53 PM

You're right, of course Baccie
It's just extremely pleasurable allowing him to humiliate himself
He obviously hasn't enough self respect to stop himself
I'm afraid I find him like a dysfunctional child, difficult to ignore while he's crapping on the sofa
Must try harder
Jim