The Brexit Thread

[thplinth]

Still don't really see why Farage is considered so evil / bad. All political parties require funding and donors. Typically they fund people who share the views that are important to them. I seem to recall a similar argument against the SNP when they were getting funded by the religious bus magnate guy Souter(?).  I have no idea why the folk opposing BREXIT keep thinking they will win this with false smears. 

The Tories inflicted this on the country by stupidly having the referendum and  both they and Corbyn went along with it limp wristed the whole way afterwards getting us into this current farce. It is their shocking performance over the last few years that should be getting slated... they are making Farage look like a 'breath of fresh air' in comparison. The one that really worries me is Gove. He is real bad news.

[Och Aye]

17 minutes ago, thplinth said:

Still don't really see why Farage is considered so evil / bad. All political parties require funding and donors. Typically they fund people who share the views that are important to them. I seem to recall a similar argument against the SNP when they were getting funded by the religious bus magnate guy Souter(?).  I have no idea why the folk opposing BREXIT keep thinking they will win this with false smears. 

The Tories inflicted this on the country by stupidly having the referendum and  both they and Corbyn went along with it limp wristed the whole way afterwards getting us into this current farce. It is their shocking performance over the last few years that should be getting slated... they are making Farage look like a 'breath of fresh air' in comparison. The one that really worries me is Gove. He is real bad news.

He was standing in front of a poster of a huge queue of immigrants whipping up racial hatred. I consider that evil/bad.

[bonny78]

1 hour ago, Caledonian Craig said:

This hits the nail on the head and is why a lot of people feel there should be a second referendum due to massive grey areas first time around on what was being voted for.

The promises from the Leave campaign was that it would secure borders (never possible given the Irish border issues) and that the UK would be free to get trade deals all over the world outwith the EU. That is not going to be happening either with May's deal so what is the point?

It’s not the best of three.    We don’t need a 2^nd referendum when the previous one was less than 3 years ago.   

 

[thplinth]

24 minutes ago, Och Aye said:

He was standing in front of a poster of a huge queue of immigrants ....

....whipping up racial hatred. 

Ha ha see this is what I am talking about.... The first part of your sentence is no doubt true but I'd bet my house that the second part is just made up. It is what you want to believe but that does not make it true.

Edited May 21, 2019 by thplinth

[phart]

1 hour ago, thplinth said:

Still don't really see why Farage is considered so evil / bad. All political parties require funding and donors. Typically they fund people who share the views that are important to them. I seem to recall a similar argument against the SNP when they were getting funded by the religious bus magnate guy Souter(?).  I have no idea why the folk opposing BREXIT keep thinking they will win this with false smears. 

The Tories inflicted this on the country by stupidly having the referendum and  both they and Corbyn went along with it limp wristed the whole way afterwards getting us into this current farce. It is their shocking performance over the last few years that should be getting slated... they are making Farage look like a 'breath of fresh air' in comparison. The one that really worries me is Gove. He is real bad news.

He's not evil in the way of say a Dick Cheney. He's a culture warrior on the opposite spectrum of the social justice warriors. Both sides have enemies. Each other.

 

[phart]

Farage is utterly owned, someone else pays his bills, feeds him, waters hims, provides him with travel expenses. He is an employee an underling to someone.

 

[thplinth]

40 minutes ago, phart said:

Farage is utterly owned, someone else pays his bills, feeds him, waters hims, provides him with travel expenses. He is an employee an underling to someone.

Not convinced by that at all. He lives in a 4m pound house and has a lifetime MEP pension worth 75 grand apparently per annum in the bag  (plus a full MEP salary with all the perks again soon). I can imagine doing what he does he incurs a lot of expenses and I can imagine some donors fund him because they like his views. But I think they are his views. How do you think all the other parties fund themselves? Donors of some description and they all want their pound of flesh at the end of the day.

Ach who cares... one thing is for sure is folk have made their minds up one way or the other it seems. I have never heard Farage say anything remotely racist in the times I watched him in the european parliament or elsewhere... Yet it is repeated or hinted at endlessly as if were an established fact. It is not. We live in very dark times politically speaking and it not because of your Farages and Trumps... they are more effect than cause IMHO.

Edited May 21, 2019 by thplinth

[phart]

10 minutes ago, thplinth said:

Not convinced by that at all. He lives in a 4m pound house and has a lifetime MEP pension worth 75 grand apparently per annum in the bag  (plus a full MEP salary with all the perks again soon). I can imagine doing what he does he incurs a lot of expenses and I can imagine some donors fund him because they like his views. But I think they are his views. How do you think all the other parties fund themselves? Donors of some description and they all want their pound of flesh at the end of the day.

Ach who cares... one thing is for sure is folk have made their minds up one way or the other it seems. I have never heard Farage say anything remotely racist in the times I watched him in the european parliament or elsewhere... Yet it is repeated or hinted at endlessly as if were an established fact. It is not. We live in very dark times politically speaking and it not because of your Farages and Trumps... they are more effect than cause IMHO.

Yeah a pension he got by missing fishery votes when he was in the building. Cause he was too busy doing what he wanted.

He got £450,000 from Aaron Banks the year after the vote which he didn't disclose cause he was "leaving politics"

Yeah exactly so he is no different from Tories Lib Dems Labour etc, all total shit shows. All paid for by defense contractors or private medical companies, the institute for economic affairs has just bee busted again for being funded by big tobacco. In fact i probably posted it here this week. Tory health secretary got a 5 figure sum. The NHS is next for privatisation and it will get done by bribing politicians. Farage looks really easy to bribe so get him to fuck too.

I'm not responsible for other folk calling him racist, I know his school teachers wrote letters about him being a fascist as that letter exists from a debate about making him a prefect. However that was 40 years ago and school kids do and say stuff for reactions.

 

 

Edited May 21, 2019 by phart

[aaid]

43 minutes ago, phart said:

Farage is utterly owned, someone else pays his bills, feeds him, waters hims, provides him with travel expenses. He is an employee an underling to someone.

 

Correct, but to who exactly, and that's the nub of the argument.

I saw this on Twitter a few days ago - "Farage is Bank's bitch, but who's bitch is Banks?"

All parties take large donations from wealthy individual or large organisations, total transparency is necessary to ensure that the electorate is aware of any possible conflict of interest.

For example, a large part of the Labour Party's funding comes from Trades Unions, that's totally transparent and it's clear that the Labour Party seeks to represent the interests of Trades Unionists - it's a separate argument how successful they are in that.

Who funds the Brext Party and Farage directly and whose interests they are really representing is less than clear.

I doubt it's a coincidence they have a convicted money launderer working for them in Finance. 

[thplinth]

Meh. 

Tommy Robinson on the other hand I find extremely shady. Very suspicious little character...

[hampden_loon2878]

4 hours ago, bonny78 said:

If u voted for brexit then u gotta vote for brexit party on Thursday. 

I wont be voting but if i were home for it i would vote snp as i believe in self determination and thats what the snp offer, their stance would be to be in europe post indy whether that be efta or full membership, however that may not be the stance of an independent scotland.

 

what was your stance on scottish independence in 2014?

[hampden_loon2878]

4 hours ago, bonny78 said:

If u voted for brexit then u gotta vote for brexit party on Thursday. 

I wont be voting but if i were home for it i would vote snp as i believe in self determination and thats what the snp offer, their stance would be to be in europe post indy whether that be efta or full membership, however that may not be the stance of an independent scotland.

 

what was your stance on scottish independence in 2014?

[bonny78]

17 minutes ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

I wont be voting but if i were home for it i would vote snp as i believe in self determination and thats what the snp offer, their stance would be to be in europe post indy whether that be efta or full membership, however that may not be the stance of an independent scotland.

 

what was your stance on scottish independence in 2014?

I voted NO because I m proud to be British and not just Scottish.   

The SNP are being laughed at for wanting independence but being in the EU - a contradiction in terms. 

[thplinth]

Of the 4 referendum voting combinations, namely,

1. Yes & Remain
2. Yes & Leave
3. No & Remain
4. No & Leave

2 and & 3 are fully coherent in themselves and logically consistent, you pick independence from the UK AND the EU or you pick to stay in both unions. I can respect both equally.

1. is a contradiction to some extent and that is the SNP position, it is not logically consistent nor fully coherent. Not as strong as 2 but better than nothing if you are independence minded. This inconsistency will come back to haunt them at some point though...

4. is the Galloway position and it the most despicable combination in my mind. Shitey pants of shitey pants. Argues against an independent Scotland and then goes all Farage when it comes to the UK in the EU. The twat in a hat cunt that he is.

[bonny78]

8 minutes ago, thplinth said:

Of the 4 referendum voting combinations, namely,

1. Yes & Remain
2. Yes & Leave
3. No & Remain
4. No & Leave

2 and & 3 are fully coherent in themselves and logically consistent, you pick independence from the UK AND the EU or you pick to stay in both unions. I can respect both equally.

1. is a contradiction to some extent and that is the SNP position, it is not logically consistent nor fully coherent. Not as strong as 2 but better than nothing if you are independence minded. This inconsistency will come back to haunt them at some point though...

4. is the Galloway position and it the most despicable combination in my mind. Shitey pants of shitey pants. Argues against an independent Scotland and then goes all Farage when it comes to the UK in the EU. The twat in a hat cunt that he is.

Number 4 for me.      George galloway is a great man and another great speaker. 

 

 

[Haggis_trap]

15 minutes ago, thplinth said:

1. is a contradiction to some extent and that is the SNP position, it is not logically consistent nor fully coherent. Not as strong as 2 but better than nothing if you are independence minded. This inconsistency will come back to haunt them at some point though...

  ^ Only if you don't understand the difference / benefits between EU membership and being an independent nation.

Joining the EU is a perfectly sensible thing for independent European nations to do.
Pool a little sovereignty in return for access to worlds largest single market.
The argument about brexit making you an independent country is smoke-screen.
Outside of EU you simply compromise in relationship with nearest neighbors in different ways (unless becoming North Korea is the goal ?)

Whilst part of the UK it is fair to say Scotland has zero sovereignty.

[bonny78]

5 minutes ago, Haggis_trap said:

  ^ Only if you don't understand the difference / benefits between EU membership and being an independent nation.

Joining the EU is a perfectly sensible thing for independent European nations to do.
Pool a little sovereignty in return for access to worlds largest single market.
The argument about brexit making you an independent country is smoke-screen.
Outside of EU you simply compromise in relationship with nearest neighbors in different ways (unless becoming North Korea is the goal ?)

Whilst part of the UK it is fair to say Scotland has zero sovereignty.

Unless you consider yourself British then suddenly you are fine.  

[Mox]

3 hours ago, thplinth said:

Ha ha see this is what I am talking about.... The first part of your sentence is no doubt true but I'd bet my house that the second part is just made up. It is what you want to believe but that does not make it true.

Ok, so from your perspective, what is Farage trying to convey when standing in front of a poster showing a queue of non white migrants with the words 'Breaking Point' plastered across it?

[Haggis_trap]

14 minutes ago, bonny78 said:

Unless you consider yourself British then suddenly you are fine.  

Errrr naw : whilst I believe in Scottish independence plenty of REMAIN voting Brits have been equally shafted by a botched brexit.
Are you pleased with the way it is going ?

[bonny78]

4 minutes ago, Haggis_trap said:

Errrr naw : whilst I believe in Scottish independence plenty of REMAIN voting Brits have been equally shafted by a botched brexit.
Are you pleased with the way it is going ?

=

Mox.   Everyone knew there might be delays getting it done prior to artical 50.  However, after artical 50 was triggered, there should be no going back.    29^th March was the day it was meant to be done and dusted by – hard brexit or not.       We’d be on the other side of brexit by now if it wasn’t for the messing about by the remainers.

[Caledonian Craig]

27 minutes ago, Haggis_trap said:

  ^ Only if you don't understand the difference / benefits between EU membership and being an independent nation.

Joining the EU is a perfectly sensible thing for independent European nations to do.
Pool a little sovereignty in return for access to worlds largest single market.
The argument about brexit making you an independent country is smoke-screen.
Outside of EU you simply compromise in relationship with nearest neighbors in different ways (unless becoming North Korea is the goal ?)

Whilst part of the UK it is fair to say Scotland has zero sovereignty.

Sorry but that old chestnut has been done to death about being in the EU is not independence.

The UK was in the EU when it made all choices of an independent country. First it chose to wage a war in the Middle East based on a catalogue of lies where hundreds of thousands of people were killed as a result. Second it opted not to join the Euro as its currency. Thirdly, is it not now leaving (or trying to) the EU? All choices that Scotland in it's current guise cannot make.

Independence is the goal to being self-governing. For being able to choose which path to take in this world and not being led blindly down a road in shackles.

[Haggis_trap]

4 minutes ago, bonny78 said:

=

Mox.   Everyone knew there might be delays getting it done prior to artical 50.  However, after artical 50 was triggered, there should be no going back.    29^th March was the day it was meant to be done and dusted by – hard brexit or not.       We’d be on the other side of brexit by now if it wasn’t for the messing about by the remainers.

 

^ Baws.

The ERG / DUP also voted against Mays deal - all be it for different reasons : however they still blocked it.
Brexiters supposedly wanted to 'take back control'.  Now they complain about Parliament exercising that exact sovereignty during the Brexit process.
You can't have it both ways.

I will ask again : you think Brexit is going well ?

Edited May 21, 2019 by Haggis_trap

[phart]

2 hours ago, thplinth said:

Meh. 

Tommy Robinson on the other hand I find extremely shady. Very suspicious little character...

ofc he is shady, got caught with a  passport that wasn't his but still got out the airport and flew back next day.

We know the huge pharma and banks run the standard MP's. Souter used to run SNP etc.

EDIT: least we're having a good old fashioned TAMB debate on the subject though. We're all probably wrong but testing your shit against others shit is how you find out.

 

Edited May 21, 2019 by phart

[phart]

2 hours ago, aaid said:

Correct, but to who exactly, and that's the nub of the argument.

I saw this on Twitter a few days ago - "Farage is Bank's bitch, but who's bitch is Banks?"

All parties take large donations from wealthy individual or large organisations, total transparency is necessary to ensure that the electorate is aware of any possible conflict of interest.

For example, a large part of the Labour Party's funding comes from Trades Unions, that's totally transparent and it's clear that the Labour Party seeks to represent the interests of Trades Unionists - it's a separate argument how successful they are in that.

Who funds the Brext Party and Farage directly and whose interests they are really representing is less than clear.

I doubt it's a coincidence they have a convicted money launderer working for them in Finance. 

Gordon Brown was moaning about thousands of £499 payments, although someone pointed out the larger problem is it's the same for any party and we could literally be selling our democracy out.

[phart]

1 hour ago, thplinth said:

Of the 4 referendum voting combinations, namely,

1. Yes & Remain
2. Yes & Leave
3. No & Remain
4. No & Leave

2 and & 3 are fully coherent in themselves and logically consistent, you pick independence from the UK AND the EU or you pick to stay in both unions. I can respect both equally.

1. is a contradiction to some extent and that is the SNP position, it is not logically consistent nor fully coherent. Not as strong as 2 but better than nothing if you are independence minded. This inconsistency will come back to haunt them at some point though...

4. is the Galloway position and it the most despicable combination in my mind. Shitey pants of shitey pants. Argues against an independent Scotland and then goes all Farage when it comes to the UK in the EU. The twat in a hat cunt that he is.

1 is consistent if you just want out of westminster cause of wars. You might think all this warring is too much of a price for a political union with rUK but since EU doesn't declare wars you're OK with entering a political Union with them.