Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafemuddy

Post to this Thread - Printer Friendly - Home
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40]


Brexit #2

Steve Shaw 16 Dec 18 - 08:13 PM
McGrath of Harlow 16 Dec 18 - 08:09 PM
Steve Shaw 16 Dec 18 - 08:05 PM
robomatic 16 Dec 18 - 07:51 PM
Nigel Parsons 16 Dec 18 - 07:45 PM
Steve Shaw 16 Dec 18 - 07:40 PM
bobad 16 Dec 18 - 07:09 PM
Stanron 16 Dec 18 - 07:08 PM
Nigel Parsons 16 Dec 18 - 07:04 PM
robomatic 16 Dec 18 - 06:46 PM
McGrath of Harlow 16 Dec 18 - 06:25 PM
Steve Shaw 16 Dec 18 - 03:38 PM
Iains 16 Dec 18 - 03:11 PM
Jim Carroll 16 Dec 18 - 03:01 PM
The Sandman 16 Dec 18 - 02:49 PM
Nigel Parsons 16 Dec 18 - 02:42 PM
Nigel Parsons 16 Dec 18 - 02:31 PM
Steve Shaw 16 Dec 18 - 01:47 PM
Mossback 16 Dec 18 - 12:11 PM
Dave the Gnome 16 Dec 18 - 10:55 AM
KarenH 16 Dec 18 - 10:26 AM
Jim Carroll 16 Dec 18 - 09:24 AM
KarenH 16 Dec 18 - 09:16 AM
Steve Shaw 16 Dec 18 - 08:36 AM
David Carter (UK) 16 Dec 18 - 08:24 AM
KarenH 16 Dec 18 - 07:39 AM
Jim Carroll 16 Dec 18 - 06:30 AM
Iains 16 Dec 18 - 06:08 AM
Big Al Whittle 16 Dec 18 - 05:58 AM
Steve Shaw 16 Dec 18 - 05:57 AM
Iains 16 Dec 18 - 04:43 AM
Iains 16 Dec 18 - 04:29 AM
Jim Carroll 16 Dec 18 - 04:06 AM
Steve Shaw 15 Dec 18 - 08:30 PM
Raggytash 15 Dec 18 - 07:28 PM
Big Al Whittle 15 Dec 18 - 07:18 PM
Steve Shaw 15 Dec 18 - 06:30 PM
Iains 15 Dec 18 - 05:51 PM
Steve Shaw 15 Dec 18 - 04:54 PM
Raggytash 15 Dec 18 - 04:38 PM
Steve Shaw 15 Dec 18 - 03:49 PM
Iains 15 Dec 18 - 03:20 PM
Iains 15 Dec 18 - 03:09 PM
David Carter (UK) 15 Dec 18 - 02:53 PM
Jim Carroll 15 Dec 18 - 02:25 PM
Nigel Parsons 15 Dec 18 - 01:49 PM
Jim Carroll 15 Dec 18 - 01:15 PM
Iains 15 Dec 18 - 01:09 PM
KarenH 15 Dec 18 - 12:51 PM
KarenH 15 Dec 18 - 12:50 PM
Share Thread
more
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:









Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 08:13 PM

The EU is not "delaying discussions on future trade," Nigel, much as you'd like that to be the case. And you really ought to bone up on the backstop. You seem to not get it at all.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 08:09 PM

3)Abandon BREXIT entirely (BREXIT EXIT) as though the first referendum had gone the other way AND make it a 2/3 or 3/4 majority for any future single choice referendum to leave.(assuming the EU will have you).

The second part of that would be impossible. A future parliament could always repeal any legislation that attempted to bind it in that way. Parliament always has the right to repeal or reverse any legislation, it's a fundamental part of our democracy.

I still haven't heard any justification for the assertion that a referendum at this time, giving a second chance to the people to decide what should happen, would be "a betrayal of democracy", with its implication that Ireland and Denmark betrayed democracy in similar circumstances in giving its electorate a opportunity of thinking again, and that those countries are less committed to democracy than this one is.

Actually the principle that is involved is the same as that in the previous paragraph. Just as parliament cannot bind itself in its future action, nor can the voters. That's why we can vote the other way in any election - and a referendum is really just a different kind of election.

The argument that if the decision in a fresh referendum was to remain, the minority who had voted for Brexit would call for a third one, doesn't stand up to critical examination. Yes, of course they might, and they'd have every right to do so. That's what those calling for us to leave the EU had been doing for years, calling for a vote to reverse the previous referendum which had confirmed our membership of what was then the Common Market. And, as with the 2016 referendum, those who had won would do everything they could to stop that dream and being successful. All part of our imperfect democratic process.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 08:05 PM

"Leave now, negotiate later."

Wow, don't you just LOVE the little Englander hubris here? Negotiate what? With whom? From what position of strength, like wot we 'ave not got? We piss the EU off, the EU wot is eight times bigger than us, and depend on deals that'll take years to seal with countries that aren't interested in us and don't need us, and you think that all that'll be better than wot we 'ave now?   Pie in the sky! Cuckoo! Cuckoo!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: robomatic
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 07:51 PM

Stanron. I really appreciate your answer. It means to me that it is far better to submit the UK to a referendum because should it go No. 3 the population has to take the blame independent of any party.

Once the referendum was over with the public could vote for the 'responsible' parties to administer it.

I think putting such a complicated decision to a deceptively simple vote and a simple majority rule was not a particularly salutary way to go BUT now we've got a much better idea of where we're going and a referenfum is the way to get past the fallout of the first referendum.

Again, the EU has been kind and presented you with a straightforward choice.

It's the clearest path forward. The cherry on top would be if Trump tweets against it. That would be the ultimate recommendation.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 07:45 PM

After the experience with the agreed backstop which was negotiated a year ago in order to enable negotiations to proceed, it is highly unlikely that the EU will agree to any such pseudo-"clarification". In the case of the backstop agreement the UK reinterpreted it, and misinterpreted it, so as to provide a cover for an attempt to back out of what they had agreed a year later.

We have not yet reached an agreement on how Brexit will be effected. Anything which has been suggested so far is a negotiating position, and can still be changed. This is the EU position. "Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed".
By delaying discussing future trade the EU are ignoring their own guidelines. 'Brexiteers' may not find this surprising.

I have quoted the guidelines before, but people (usually remainers) insist on ignoring them in this discussion.
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. The Union will approach the negotiations with unified positions, and will engage with the United Kingdom exclusively through the channels set out in these guidelines and in the negotiating directives. So as not to undercut the position of the Union, there will be no separate negotiations between individual Member States and the United Kingdom on matters pertaining to the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the Union.
3. The core principles set out above should apply equally to the negotiations on an orderly withdrawal, to any preliminary and preparatory discussions on the framework for a future relationship, and to any form of transitional arrangements.

From the EU's own guidelines : Here


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 07:40 PM

Another referendum is no more a "betrayal of the referendum" than the 2016 referendum was a betrayal of the 1975 referendum. If we have another referendum, all those people who voted leave can still vote leave, and they'll get what they want. What are you afraid of? That a few of your leave compatriots will have changed their minds in the light of all the new information we now have and swing the vote? Give over! :-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: bobad
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 07:09 PM

I got his number eons ago Nigel, glad to see you coming around.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Stanron
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 07:08 PM

Of the options 1, 2 or 3 I prefer 2. Cold Brexit. Leave now, negotiate later. This would give us, the UK, the strongest hand.

Option 1. Brerxit May leaves the UK with a weaker bargaining hand but attempts to placify those people who don't want to leave the EU in ther first place.

Option 3 is a betrayal of the referendum. Any party that enforced option 3 would be political toast for the next 30 years.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 07:04 PM

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 03:38 PM
Well you're wrong about everything all the time, Niggler, but I don't go on about it.
Mind you, I am tempted...


Once again, shown to be wrong, cannot accept it, reduced to insult and name calling.

Maybe I should start misusing his name (as he does mine) and calling him "Steve Shat" after all, he posts a load of crap!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: robomatic
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 06:46 PM

The past:
I just watched a very sympathetic documentary about the life of Sir Winston Churchill. Even in his era, they were talking in the U.K. about a "United States of Europe" (U.S.E.) I think the European Union is what they got. It wasn't perfect but the main goal of no more world wars out of Europe was achieved. That and NATO are not small potatoes.

The present:
I think a multiple choice referendum is the best way out for the current UK:

1)BREXIT MAY - Accept the terms as promulgated by EU and Theresa May.
2)Cold BREXIT. Leave now and negotiate after.
3)Abandon BREXIT entirely (BREXIT EXIT) as thought the first referendum had gone the other way AND make it a 2/3 or 3/4 majority for any future single choice referendum to leave.
(assuming the EU will have you).

Those are the clear seamless choices UK has because the EU has laid down the law. They've done you a favor and kept it simple.

Since this is multiple choice you have to determine if it will be a simple majority win situation or you want to have a minimum percentage of electorate on the winning selection. But that is simple enough for anyone to understand and gets the political 'leaders' out of the loop since they seem to be bogged down by the situation.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 06:25 PM

One of the most dishonest claims made by what is still referred to as "the government", though it has ceased to be an effective government, is that Theresa May is seeking "clarifications" about the withdrawal agreement. In reality what she is seeking is to find some form of words which might enable her to obscure and fudge the meaning of that agreement.

After the experience with the agreed backstop which was negotiated a year ago in order to enable negotiations to proceed, it is highly unlikely that the EU will agree to any such pseudo-"clarification". In the case of the backstop agreement the UK reinterpreted it, and misinterpreted it, so as to provide a cover for an attempt to back out of what they had agreed a year later.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 03:38 PM

Well you're wrong about everything all the time, Niggler, but I don't go on about it.

Mind you, I am tempted...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 03:11 PM

"You may add to that that the referendum was held at a time when the state was at war with Britain."

What state and what war was that then? Pray enlighten us all!
Is this another story that starts Once upon a time?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 03:01 PM

V2
You've had the reasons for that vote - fully documented
You may add to that that the referendum was held at a time when the state was at war with Britain
All academic anyway - the situation at the present time is there is around a 25%difference between those who want Irish unity and those who don't, despite the fact that the Unionists still make up the majority of te population - the massive leap is indicative that the time for ending partition is well past its sell-by date
Partitioning countries is the legacy of a (thankfully dead) system
NO COUNTRY SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO PARTITION ANOTHER
The hint is in the name IRELAND
Are you really defending this practice, or this more of your nit-picking ?
Brexit has more-or-less rung the death toll on the partition - and quite possinbly The 'United' kingdom as a whole
Jeez - the Empire has never died in the the minds of the Little Englanders
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: The Sandman
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 02:49 PM

mean while the EU is intending to penalise british holidaymakers after 2021
British tourists wanting to visit Europe after Brexit face a €7 fee and an online application process after the UK government outlined new immigration rules yesterday.

Under a plan announced by Theresa May at the Conservative Party conference in Birmingham, Europeans wanting to visit Britain on holiday would have to submit to security and criminal records checks before they arrive in the country.

Sources in Europe told The Times that this would automatically result in British citizens having to participate in the European Union’s new travel authorisation system, which is due to come into effect in 2021.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 02:42 PM

From: Raggytash
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 04:38 PM
You may recall Iains that the Nationalists boycotted the 1973 referendum as only unionists voted.
Thus if 100 people voted and 98% voted to remain you arrive at your figure (appromimately Nigel!)
The result was meaningless.


The referendum was decisive. 98.9% of those voting decided to remain part of UK.
The votes of those who chose not to vote cannot be accurately counted for either side of the vote.
However, if, as you say, "Nationalists boycotted the vote" then even if they were the only ones who didn't vote (unlikely), and you attribute all of their votes as being against remaining part of the UK, of those who voted 98.9% voted to remain as part of the UK. If you include all those who didn't vote, on a 58.7% turnout, 98.9% of the 58.7% would still give a vote for remaining part of the UK of just over 58% of the total electorate. So the fact that Nationalists boycotted the vote had no meaningful effect.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 02:31 PM

Spot on there with Portugal, Nigs. I was just testing you. And, let's face it, getting you to check all the little piddly details does keep you off the streets.

I was also right about the fact that you are unable to ever admit that you're wrong. "I was just testing you".
No, you screwed up!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 01:47 PM

Yes I know, Jim, but the "lack of clarity" as perceived and as whipped up by the tabloids is in danger of working against Labour. "The Tories might have screwed things up but Labour is not giving us a viable alternative." I get it, you get it but it's all too easy an argument to make.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Mossback
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 12:11 PM

"Britain may have lost the right to claim Americans are dumber, but the US clearly has no right to feel any political superiority. Indeed, it feels as if certain parts of American society now feel a sort of exhausted solidarity with the UK, a relief that they are not the only ones whose country is a raging dumpster fire.

A new sort of special relationship has been forged between the UK and the US; we are united by the fact that we have become global jokes."

Check It Out:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/16/when-americans-want-to-understand-brexit-its-clear-britain-is-in-trouble


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 10:55 AM

Because, Karen, the simple no deal with Europe and ease of trade with other states is yet another lie that the brexit team have been caught out in.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 10:26 AM

And if 'no deal' is so simple, why is Liam Fox (according to Daily Mail) preparing to spend 100 million on trade negotiators if this happens?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 09:24 AM

"It would, however, be good to have a better idea of Labour's honest position in all this.
Not sure that is either possible or necessary Steve - if the elected Majority is not going to listen to each other they're not going to listen to anybody else
Let them dig their own graves and bury their own dismembered corpse, nobody else could make a better job of it than they are

A manipulated referendum got Britain into this mess, it will take another, based on real information to get her out if it
Interesting to listen to Liam Fox rejecting a second referendum today - you can bet that once they start doing that, it's a possibility
Fox said he was against a second referendum because "it would divide the country" !!!!!
You couldn't make this crows up if you were writing a script for 'Spitting Image"
Jim


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 09:16 AM

I see that David. But the argument has been put and I am still struggling to see why people regard it as a good argument. Also,
in the face of a 'hard Brexit' those pro Brexit people argue that WTO terms would kick in so trade would continue.


There are some big issues about the sort of terms the USA would want to impose as I understand it. This applies also to the TTIP that was being negotiated betweern the USA and the EU, which was an argument in favour of coming out of the EU. You guessed it, the USA wants less environmental protection, etc. ALso I read that there are moves to make trade agreements with the USA actually secret, so how that figures with democratic accountability and taking back control I cannot see. The whole thing is also seen as a threat to European Social Models.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 08:36 AM

"Any intervention by the Labour Party might well have caused the Tories to close ranks against the common enemy"

That is spot-on and is why Labour have yet to bring a motion of no confidence in the government. It would unite the Tories and, given that the DUP have yet to jump ship, the motion would fail and the Tories would be secure. That situation could change if May can't persuade the DUP to accept her deal, which I'm sure they won't in its current form. It would, however, be good to have a better idea of Labour's honest position in all this. We are definitely not hearing enough from Jezza.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 08:24 AM

I have still not had anyone answer the question of why importing more from a country than we export to it is a bad thing. We get lots of good stuff from Germany. In return, all we have to give them is money, which we have. With the USA it's the opposite. Mostly because they do not produce stuff which we want and need. If we do not have a good trading relationship with the EU, including Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the range of goods available in our shops and supermarkets will be vastly reduced, to our detriment.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 07:39 AM

Still not getting any satisfactory response on the question of why the fact that the Germans sell more to us than we sell to them means that we have a strong hand in negotiating with the EU.

Nobody is going to ban German goods from entering the UK. They are not going to lose their market if we come out of the EU, are they?

Not only that, but it seems that Germany is the 2nd on the list of countries we export to. Looked at like that, it seems that if we do 'lose' the abilitity to export to Germany, we will be losing our 2nd largest market. Size isn't everything, is it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 06:30 AM

LABOUR SITUATION HERE
Not so much a split, but an open debate
Chissum represents the new Left that have now taken control of the Party, while Flint represents the right-wing New Labour old Guard
Personally, I think Corbyn has boxed clever (at least I hope what is happening is deliberate)
They have avoided any major in-fighting by steering clear of the melee and have allowed the Tories to self-destruct (as displayed here by our own little band of right wing brothers)
Whatever happens, the Tories have torn themselves into shreds without the help of the Labour Party - all their own self-destructive work.
Any intervention by the Labour Party might well have caused the Tories to close ranks against the common enemy
If it was deliberate, it is brilliant and has shown Corbyn to be a great tactician, if it wasn't - it was sheer good luck
To say that the Tory Party will never be the same again is to put it mildly - they are really shitting on their own doorstep
At least there is an open debate within Labour whether to hold a second referendum - it hasn't even been considered by the Tories
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 06:08 AM

An Irish view:
As somebody said, regarding the British Brexit negotiating team: if the British had the same team negotiating with us in 1922, we'd not only still have the 6 counties, but Wales too.

Sadly they are probably right. When you have a remainer leading the negotiations for departure...........?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 05:58 AM

Watching Andrew Marr.

Apparently Labour is anti Brexit.

But!

They are fighting with each other about what anti Brexit means.

They could decomplicate things with a policy statement, something like

Apart from Dennis Skinner - WE DON"T WANNA LEAVE!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 05:57 AM

Nick Cohen, eh? Well you should be pleased that the Guardian embraces such a broad spectrum of columnists that people like Nick can be included. He's so right-wing that even Blair accused him of undermining him when New Labour was at the helm. Quite a bellicose-minded chap too. From wiki:

He was an advocate of the 2003 invasion of Iraq and a critic of the Stop the War Coalition. An opponent of what he has termed the "tyrannophile left"Cohen has criticised individuals such as Andrew Murray and George Galloway, while expressing his admiration for the opposition movements in countries such as Belarus. He called for Western military intervention in the Syrian Civil War. He also supported the NATO-led intervention in Libya to oust former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2011. Cohen criticised Ecuador for granting political asylum to Julian Assange and called Ecuador a "petro-socialist authoritarian state".

Thing is, Iains, you throw scorn at the Guardian whenever you can, yet here you are cherrypicking a bit of stuff that feeds into your confirmation bias. Talk about giving yourself away. I have never liked Nick Cohen, along with several other Guardian columnists, but guess what, I still buy the paper. Unlike you I'm not constantly on the lookout for the succour of people whose views happen to chime with mine. No wonder you can't debate things. You never see things in the round because you only consider sources that you think you'll agree with. To employ common street parlance, you're sussed, mate.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 04:43 AM

The link goes nowhere

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/16/why-are-labour-party-leaders-so-quiet-on-europe---maybe-it-is-the-lure-of-disaster


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 04:29 AM

Now for something sensible!
I was surprised to see the following in the Guardian, Guido will be miffed:
"
Why are Labour’s leaders so quiet on Europe? Maybe it’s the lure of disaster. The party’s apparent defeatism on Brexit is grounded in old-style Leninist fantasy.

It seems a brutally honest depiction of corbyn and his dream team.
"Labour has inherited the mental deformations of the Leninist style of doing business: the leadership personality cult, the love of conspiracy theory, the robotic denunciations of opponents, and most critically for our current crisis, the ineradicable fantasy that the worse conditions for the masses become, the brighter the prospects of the far left are. Disaster socialism is its alternative to disaster capitalism."

Printed in the Guardian, therefore every word is guaranteed to be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/16/why-are-labour-party-leaders-so-quiet-on-europe---maybe-it-is-the-lure-of-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Dec 18 - 04:06 AM

"IN the 1973 referendum in Northern Ireland ?57% voted of which 98.9% voted to remain within the UK."
When Ireland was partitioned, the Northern Counties were left with the wealth producing industries and the best land
We first visited Ireland around this time and there was hrdly a young person between 17 to 45 living in this town - they'd all gone to America
Up to when Ireland joined the E.U. the Republic was still recovering from the hard times
With the outbreak of the Troubles and the economic situation, Northerners regarded the South as a liability
hen Ireland joined the E.U. it prospered and became "The Celtic Tiger" until the International bankers fucked up the economy agan
The position now as far as unity is concerned is that in the North the demand has shot up to almost parity and in the South, it is now regarded as inevitable thanks to Brexit
You have been told how your "majority" was obtained - the dead of The Trouble, when demands for Civil Rights of a minority led to open warfare shows just how democratic The North was
More recently, the same "democracy" was used in Britain when the Government bribed the terrorist linked DUP £1 billion of the British taxpayers money in order to stay in office

None of which makes your claim of "choosing to partition" anything but a crass load of invented horse-shit
Partition has produced decades of persecution and warfare - no nation has a right to partition another as history has shown... Korea, Cyprus, Vietnam, India, - all trouble spots and all hangover of Empire
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 08:30 PM

"I see mr shaw does not understand the difference between a referendum vote where a simple majority dictates outcomes, and a vote of confidence in a Prime Minister..."

Well 38% of the electorate is not a simple majority. Nor is 37% of Tory MPs. Simple majorities would be 50%+I of the electorate/Tory MPs. Hope this helps.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Raggytash
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 07:28 PM

If you cannot figure out for yourself why the 1973 referendum was meaningless I, for one, am not about to start your education, I have far better things to do than try and enlightnen a committed hard line right wing bigot.

For instance the music and singing in here tonight is superb and still ongoing !!!

Message timed 00.27 GMT.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 07:18 PM

Still no cards with stagecoaches on them... probably the bleeding French up to their old tricks!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 06:30 PM

Yeah, whatever.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 05:51 PM

The result was meaningless.
IN the 1973 referendum in Northern Ireland ?57% voted of which 98.9% voted to remain within the UK.
Please explain how it can be meaningless when 98.9% of 57% of the electorate voted to remain. In a democracy a simple majority prevails
and 98.9% of 57% is a very clear majority.
Do you have anything sensible to say or are you trying to follow your compatriots with drivel?

Not too good at maths, these hard-right faux-democrats, are they?
I see mr shaw does not understand the difference between a referendum vote where a simple majority dictates outcomes, and a vote of confidence in a Prime Minister.
The former is a democratic vote, the latter is a confidence vote. In the case of a confidence vote a majority may or may not suffice. Mrs. Thatcher won a confidence vote but was still toppled one week later.
The self proclaimed well educated scientist seems to think it is merely a simple mathematical exercise to demonstrate outcomes. Some of us know better!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 04:54 PM

Interesting that the hard brexiteers told us that 38% was the voice of the people, and that 37% of Tories was enough to justify ditching Theresa. Not too good at maths, these hard-right faux-democrats, are they? :-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Raggytash
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 04:38 PM

You may recall Iains that the Nationalists boycotted the 1973 referendum as only unionists voted.

Thus if 100 people voted and 98% voted to remain you arrive at your figure (appromimately Nigel!)

The result was meaningless.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 03:49 PM

Spot on there with Portugal, Nigs. I was just testing you. And, let's face it, getting you to check all the little piddly details does keep you off the streets.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 03:20 PM

Reunification the facts:

Who gets to decide whether and when to hold a border poll?

The UK Government has the power to call a referendum in Northern Ireland.

The Good Friday Agreement states that "the Secretary of State" should call a referendum "‘if at any time it appears likely to him that a majority of those voting would express a wish that Northern Ireland should cease to be part of the United Kingdom and form part of a united Ireland."

The Secretary of State would do this by laying before Parliament an Order in Council, specifying the details of the poll and the date on which it will be held.

In the Republic of Ireland, reunification would require a constitutional amendment. This would require legislation to be passed by both chambers of Parliament, before it was put to the people in a referendum.

In the event that either part of Ireland voted against reunification, another poll cannot be held within seven years.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 03:09 PM

"I wasn't aware of any recent vote by Northern Ireland for partition."
They didn't - the Mindless Muppet with the foul mouth claimed they did but we all above to make allowances



I am sure you would like to entertain and enlighten us all by providing a link to substantiate your twaddle. I must remember the expression mindless muppet, it suits you to a T. Make my day - Prove me wrong!
Again you provide an example of reacting to something you thought was said (or more probably bending and twisting what was said) rather than what was actually said. Have you no shame, or does being a clown come naturally?

The Northern Ireland border poll was a referendum held in Northern Ireland on 8 March 1973 on whether Northern Ireland should remain part of the United Kingdom or join with the Republic of Ireland to form a united Ireland.
98.9% voted to remain. Since then the demographic has changed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 02:53 PM

The fact that we buy a lot of goods from the EU is a reason to stay in the EU. Quality and range for consumers is important. I don't see what the USA produces that we need.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 02:25 PM

"I wasn't aware of any recent vote by Northern Ireland for partition."
They didn't - the Mindless Muppet with the foul mouth claimed they did but we all above to make allowances
Thank you for allowing me to underline his idiocy again
Happy Crimbo Nigel
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 01:49 PM

"More little jimmie rubbish! "
Are you really the only one to realise that your uncontrolled outbursts only underline your ignorance and mental dwarfism ?
Perhaps you can tell us about the North voting for partition again !!


I wasn't aware of any recent vote by Northern Ireland for partition. Can you link to it so that I can read what has actually been said?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 01:15 PM

"More little jimmie rubbish! "
Are you really the only one to realise that your uncontrolled outbursts only underline your ignorance and mental dwarfism ?
Perhaps you can tell us about the North voting for partition again !!
Jeez....!!!
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 01:09 PM

The argument is tha Europe needs our markets £100billion/year more than we need their markets.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b&biw=1366&bih=590&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=F0EVXO7WINLCxgOTmrSIBA&q=did++May+vote+remian+in+referendum&oq=did++May+vote+remian+in+referendum&gs_l=img.12...0.0..9336...0.0..0.0.0.......0......gws-wiz-img.ijXCArYhEzo#imgrc=5jfvJlXlavI3BM:

As I said duplicitous!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 12:51 PM

Forgive typos. I guess the argument might be that we will stop buying EU goods because they will get more expensive, which seems likely due to queues at Dover etc. Sadly, I do not fancy chlorinated junk and so on.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 15 Dec 18 - 12:50 PM

I cannot see why Ians imagines that the fact that we buy a lot of goods from the EU should mean that they want us in the UE.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate
Next Page

  Share Thread:
More...


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.



Mudcat time: 17 December 12:34 AM EST

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 1998 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation, Inc. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.