Jump to content

There Was No Possibility!


Gluestick
 Share

Recommended Posts

"the British public and voter and taxpayer Angry [:@] has been lied to serially, since Heath's blatant misrepresentations and outright calumnies in 1973!"

In that case, should the British public and voter and taxpayer not have learned, after 40+ years of experience, not to take at face value everything they're told by any politician?

You make it sound like the BPV&T plays an entirely passive role, sitting there being told what to believe and what to think, but frankly if it's going to vote it should use its brain and be a bit critical.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote user="mint"][quote user="NickP"]

You do know what the latest phrase for "lying" is, don't you? It's called a "it's-written-on-the-side-of-the-bus", that is with reference to the 350 million pounds a week for the NHS if we left the EU

The writing on the bus never said that all of the 350m would be spent on the NHS at all. It said" we send 350m to the EU , let us fund the NHS instead". Just saying[/quote]

[url]https://www.google.fr/search?q=brexit+bus&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-ab&gfe_rd=cr&ei=inJBWN-eMaWN8Qe_urn4DQ[/url]

Doesn't INSTEAD mean all of the 350 million that we would be sending to the EU?

It certainly didn't say let us use SOME of that money to fund the NHS instead, did it?

It's a rum old language full of ambiguities, English; it's a wonder anyone, nevermind foreigners manage to learn it[geek]

[/quote]

OK, putting the record straight.  I see that I had an "end quote" after

Nick's words of "Just saying".  I don't know how my words have ended up

as though they were Nick's.  He has objected privately to me about

this.  I do blame the forum software as my screen shows, well, what it

shows........still, sorry, Nick!

Also, I thought I posted a

picture of the side of the bus and I will try to do it again, just so

that not the whole page shows but only the bus's side.

Here is a link showing the image and the source:

[url]http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/boris-johnsons-brexit-campaign-prints-7943300[/url]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="EuroTrash"]

You make it sound like the BPV&T plays an entirely passive role,

sitting there being told what to believe and what to think, but frankly

if it's going to vote it should use its brain and be a bit

critical.[/quote]

Nail on Head, ET!

So sadly, the great British Voter doesn't actually deserve a damned vote!

Brain? I wish!

It's

miniscule brain is far too concerned with football, soap operas, the

latest moronic "Reality" TC show (look at the viewing figures of such as

Strictly pretend to be able to dance"; the X Rubbish, et al; and in

general drooling over the latest celeb as if they were in process of

saving the World and humanity.

Ah me, the Roman Senators had it all worked out way back; give 'em bread and circuses; that'll keep the plebs in line!

Today,

the "bread" being take aways, ready meals which can be hoovered up

from the settee without missing a second of the mindless garbage of TV:

and the "circuses" being self-obvious.

Churchill had it all worked out:

"The best argument against democracy, is a five minute conversation with the average voter."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="powerdesal"]Mint, you may have interpreted the use of the word ''instead'' to mean that the whole amount would be spent on the NHS, some of us have a different interpretation.

Who is right and who is wrong can be discussed at length - but what would be the point of that ?[/quote]

No point indeed, Steve.  It no longer has any relevance now there's been so much water passed under the bridge

But it might be crucially important for T May how the Supreme Court judges interpret whether the triggering of Art. 15 requires the input of parliament or could be left to May and her advisors to decide on behind closed doors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How's this -

When Edward Heath, Minister of

State for Europe, visited Professor Hallstein, the President of the

European Commission, in November 1960, his report on the meeting noted

how Hallstein had emphasised that joining the Community was not just a

matter of adopting a common tariff “which was the essential hallmark of

any ‘State’ (and he regarded the EEC as a

potential‘State’)”. It would be necessary, Hallstein insisted, for any

new entrant to accept the principle that the EEC was intended to evolve

into something much deeper, “some form of Federal State”, which was what

the Commission was working towards (PRO/FO 371/150369).

 Particularly revealing in this context was the reply given in

December 1960 by the Lord Chancellor, Lord Kilmuir, to a request from Mr

Heath for comments on what would be the constitutional implications of

signing the Treaty for Britain’s sovereignty. Kilmuir responded that in

several respects the loss of sovereignty would be considerable: by

Parliament; by the Crown in terms of treaty-making powers; and by the

courts, which to an extent would become“subordinate” to the European

Court of Justice (PRO/FO 371/150369, Bell pp.36-9).

On the making of laws, Kilmuir said it was clear that:

the Council of Ministers would eventually (after the

system of qualified majority voting had come into force) make

regulations which would be binding on us even against our wishes …it

would in theory be possible for Parliament to enact at the outset

legislation which would give automatic force of law to any existing or

future regulations made by the appropriate organs 
of the

Community. For Parliament to do this would go far beyond the most

extensive delegation of powers, even in wartime, that we have ever

experienced and I do not think there is any likelihood of this being

acceptable to the House of Commons”.

As for the subordination of Britain’s courts to the European Court of Justice, Kilmuir wrote:

I must emphasise that in my view the surrenders of

sovereignty involved are serious ones, and I think that, as a matter of

practical politics, it will not be easy to persuade Parliament or the

British public to accept them. I am sure that it would be a great

mistake to underestimate the force of the objections to them. But these

objections should be brought out into the open now because, if we

attempt to gloss over them at this stage, those who are opposed to the

whole idea of joining the Community will certainly seize on them with

more damaging effect later on”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Hoddy"]Gluestick, in your contempt for the average British voter, you may have missed the fact that Planet Earth is currently more popular than the X factor.[/quote]

Hoddy: you may well like to review the stated viewing stats:

Here:

Interesting how the Number two is only a little behind...

And that weekly view of East Enders, aggregated is so enormous.

And, btw, I do not suffer "Contempt" either of or for the British Voter.

Point of fact I feel rather sorry for them; they have been brainwashed.

However, the singular fact remains, Britain's supposed democratic future lies in the hands of the mainly illiterate, ill-informed, uncouth oik. And their malaise is worsening, rather than improving.

Personally, as a once extremely patriotic royalist, who was extremely proud to be British and considered myself most fortunate to have been born in this wondrous land.

This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle,

This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,

This other Eden, demi-paradise,

This fortress built by Nature for herself

Against infection and the hand of war,

This happy breed of men, this little world,

This precious stone set in the silver sea,

Which serves it in the office of a wall

Or as a moat defensive to a house,

Against the envy of less happier lands,--

This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.

King Richard II; Act Two, Scene One.

Now? I am bloody ashamed of it and a majority of its denizens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rabbie wrote,

 

The only concrete results I have seen so far

is an increase in hate crime - not a win there IMO.

 

 

 

 

Is this what you have been reading in the

LYING MEDIA  ?? If I can borrow a term often used by the ‘Time man of the year’,

the president elect, Mr Donald J Trump???

 

Take the major headlines which were in the

news of a poor Polish gentleman who was brutally murdered in Harlow Essex.  This

was all due to the ‘Brexit effect’ we were told by the lying media. It was the

lead story on the TV for days.

 

This was a ‘hate crime’ they screamed, Polish

police were sent to the UK, high ranking Polish officials visited Harlow, there

was a march by anti racists in support of Immigrants in Harlow, what terrible

people the leavers were.

 

Well the guy who committed the ‘murder’ has

now been charged, turns out he is just fifteen years of age. He has been charged

with manslaughter, no mention of a ‘race hate’ crime, the police stated, there

was no evidence of any.

 

Fighting at late night takeaways is a pastime

in Harlow, it has gone on since the town was built, and on occasions people die,

people do get murdered in Harlow, its a fact of life. But the ‘lying media’ have

really played this one well, and some gullible suckers  believe every single

word of this race baiting the media write and say, more fool

them!!!!!

 

 

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

re 'hate crime' -

I'm sure many of you are aware that -

'wolf whistling' is now regarded as a 'race/hate crime'....

That is the reason the figures have gone up so much.   How many of you as young men did a bit of wolf whistling....

now you'd be regarded as crimianls !!!!

You're all criminals..............!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a load of b*llocks Chessie , to quote Boris Johnson. Wolf whistling is most certainly not a hate crime, although may be considered offensive by some, and might also indicate that the person doing it has little between their ears.

This is a nice explanation on hate incidents and hate crime.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/northeast/victims_and_witnesses/hate_crime/

A hate crime is

Any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice based on a person's race or perceived race; religion or perceived religion; sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation; disability or perceived disability and any crime motivated by hostility or prejudice against a person who is transgender or perceived to be transgender."

Wolf whistling is not a criminal offence.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lindal - excuse me - I would agree with you about wolf whistling now classified as a 'hate crime' as a complete load of'*** '-

but you obviously didn't read this -

in the Guardian !! -

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/jul/13/nottinghamshire-police-count-wolf-whistling-hate-crime

Explains the 'rise' in numbers of hate crime....

Apology please  !!!!!!!!

Chessie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting.........

Point of fact it was the UN who extended the definition of "Racism" to include ethnicity.

Later, it was the Liberal-Left who were responsible for the Criminal Justice Act (CJA) and the later amendments to include a range of people who were or could be, "Offended"...

This has now reached the position where a Christian vicar, priest, pastor et al, who mounts his/her pulpit and preaches from the Bible, can be locked up!

Whereas I have yet to see any member of the Black or Muslim community charged under this act and amendments. For example, a devout Christian bakers in Ireland, were clearly set-up by a militant gay man and fined large amounts; the bakers' defence was the act was contrary to their deep and sincere religious Christian beliefs.

Yet how about Muslims who refuse to serve pork and alcohol? How about Imams and Mullahs stating gays must be thrown from the roof of tall buildings? Wives must be beaten?

Etc.

Just yesterday, a Twitter storm erupted , when a young UKIP member posted the following:

"Anish Patel

I know this is early, Merry Christmas to all. We are a Western Christian country. If this country loses its identity the rest is meaningless.".

He is a practising Hindu, by the way.

See here:

 He was inundated by excoriating messages and twitters, which in the broad sense were under both UN and CJA definition "Racist"!

I have experience of Indians; and believe me, they are perhaps the most "Racist" of all! Thanks to their cast system...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Comments from poster in today's Guardian - refers and gives link to French newspaper - some of you might care to read it;  and it shows that concerns about immigration is not confined to the 'insult, insult, insult' British -
  • even a certain Y Cooper was today admitting numbers should be controlled - and that she disagreed with 'Jeremy' (who he ???)

  • Burnham is right - of course there is a need for some controls to achieve fair - not unbridled- freedom of movement.
  • Whenever I've said so in a Guardian post- or pointed to the fact that

    the original Treaty of Rome construed free movement as the movement of

    WORKERS _ ie those with a job offer- the invariable response was that

    this was a problem for the UK only, not for any other EU member state.

    I've discovered today that this is false. Unbridled freedom of

    movement is as much if not more a problem in the Commission President's

    country . In Luxembourg, the majority - 70% of the population - are now

    made up of foreign-born people. So much so, said this Luxemburger I met,

    that the natives jokingly refer to themselves as Extra-Terrestrials.

    Aliens in their own country who have to speak French of German - rather

    than their own Luxemburg dialect - to go to the hairdressers' or

    bakers'. And in order to try to avoid the disappearance of the

    Luxembourg dialect, it is now becoming the compulsory idiom in schools.

    The problem is not simply one of non-EU migrant. The Luxemburger I met

    blamed east Europeans for the wave of crime in the country- whether that

    is right or not, I don't know. But unbridled freedom of movement is,

    according to them, also a problem in Luxembourg.

    We would not have had Brexit if the rigid EU bureaucracy had been a

    more prepared to listen to the people of Britain - and others. The risk

    to the EU is not one of 'contagion', but its refusal to face up to the

    crisis it faces in not listening to the demand in Europe as a whole for

    what de Gaulle called a Europe of Nations. Even Euro intellectuals are

    now saying that there is a need for the EU to review itself. Tell me if

    you'd like a link ( in French).

    • Eh bien, c'est surement un cas de jetter le bebe avec l'eau de bain...

      The EU will and must reform. We should lead that process, not observe it from the margins of obscurity.

      What does Europe then do with all the people arriving in Europe?

There have been growing concerns from all european citizens - which have been ignored by the elites;  then they wonder why 'populism' - the voice of the people - is on the rise.   And please note - populism is a respectable word for a respectable feeling;  even though the beeb in it's wisdom having failed with all the other 'insult' that have been thrown at people -

is now using 'populist' as an insult.

Won't work any more.

Chessie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A hate incident is only recorded if it is reported and only deemed a crime if a criminal act has been committed. One building company in Nottingham was reported by one girl and the 'crime' was harassment. Hardly responsible for the recent increase in hate crime, which has been predominantly racially motivated.

I think there will be a lot of British immigrants living in France who are or will be very worried about the recent vilification of anyone living anywhere with a different accent. Very few British immigrants are workers, most are retired..or working for themselves, and very few would be capable of meeting MLPs tightened criteria for permanent residence.

And I'll think twice about using popularism as an insult if you stop using this made up phrase of 'liberal elite'. I mean..what on earth is that supposed to mean..just anyone who reads the guardian, anyone who had an education, anyone who votes liberal or labour? What a pointless label.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lindal - please excuse me - but I don't think I have used the phrase 'liberal elite';  if you read the extract from the Guardian you will understand that it was a comment made by someone else.

It's not a phrase I use.

And the word 'populist' is well used by the bbc - and others.

Usually preceded by the words 'far right' populist movement.   This could be termed insulting as anyone who checks their dictionary will understand that 'populist' refers to 'the people' - so when the beeb uses it as a form of insult - the beeb is insulting all its licence payers.   And those are not my views - but the views of many posters - on many newspaper and other sites.

I'm not going to bother checking up about other numerous wolf-whistling 'hate' crimes - but it wasn't just that one incident, you know.

Chessie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...