keano77

diable rouge Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Dubai, built from modern day slavery/exploitation > of immigrants. > Happy New Year serfs... > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7985361.stm How do you think Britain was built historically?

I share your concerns JoeLeg on Dubai?s religious, political and institutional system. However, in welcoming in the New Year, a new start, new opportunities, to put behind us the less attractive aspects of 2018 and seize the future anew, I see no harm in the universal message ?Happy New Year from Dubai? Kahn could learn much from that outward embracing message

The firework display was great and I don?t have a problem with Kahn?s welcoming message as such, although spending British tax payers? money on an EU-themed, London-centric message is questionable. Where were the other non-EU languages of all those nationalities who have made Britain what it is? Hindi, Urdu to name just two. Compare Kahn?s little European outlook to Dubai?s display. In English (the lingua franca) Dubai wished the world ?Happy New Year from Dubai? That?s class.

One of my neighbours? doorbell sets off my doorbell but only when the batteries in mine are running out of power and need changing. I leant this the hard way by making a fool of myself accusing delivery drivers of ringing my doorbell when they were three or four doors down the road delivering to my neighbour. Your neighbour might need to replace their battery rather than it being a frequency problem.

If they extend A50 doesn?t that mean it can?t be revoked unilaterally?

No criticism of civilservant?s non-PC use of language JoeLeg? Amazing. I think you?ve lost it JoeLeg. Why not go and bully uncleglen, you seem to enjoy that

civilservant Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > keano77 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > What on Earth is wrong with both of you (and > > civilservant) We?ve had all the crowing and PR > > hype, what great turn outs, evidence of a > > groundswell that the British people have > changed > > their minds etc. > > > > Unfortunately, as embarrassing as you may find > > this, the pictures of those who participated in > > the marches do not reflect the multicultural > > nature of Britain. Fact. Not my fault. There > may > > be many pictures that I haven?t seen that are > more > > balanced but I haven?t seen them in the papers, > on > > TV or on Google images. > > > > Why is it racist to question the seemingly > > unrepresentative nature of the public record of > > the marches? > > > > Rhetorical question - I don?t expect any > sensible > > answers > > oooh keano, the poor darkies need you to speak up > for them, is that it? > take it from me, mate, sometimes they're actually > able to make up their minds for themselves, > believe it or not > > you have the temerity, the absolute arsiness, to > ask what the matter is with me, do you? > if you play the race card, then come on, at least > have the guts to play it through to the end, don't > try and duck out, like a lily-livered nincompoop, > you prat! Oh oh, the edf equivalent of the nutter who sits next to you on the bus

JoeLeg, if it doesn?t look like a duck, doesn?t swim like a duck and doesn?t quack like a duck maybe it ain?t a duck (Apologies to ducks in case I?m guilty of duckism/fowlism/poultry-ism)

You might be right Rendel about the BAME support for a second vote but your statistics are not reflected in the pictures of the people who marched in the summer, in Liverpool or yesterday.

What on Earth is wrong with both of you (and civilservant) We?ve had all the crowing and PR hype, what great turn outs, evidence of a groundswell that the British people have changed their minds etc. Unfortunately, as embarrassing as you may find this, the pictures of those who participated in the marches do not reflect the multicultural nature of Britain. Fact. Not my fault. There may be many pictures that I haven?t seen that are more balanced but I haven?t seen them in the papers, on TV or on Google images. Why is it racist to question the seemingly unrepresentative nature of the public record of the marches? Rhetorical question - I don?t expect any sensible answers

Absolutely pathetic. Making accusations of racism has become the refuge of scoundrels.

What if the vote were 52% remain and 48% leave? Would such a slim majority be acceptable or definitive and settle the question once and for all? What percentage would be acceptable - 55-45, 60-40, 70-30? If Remain ?won? would the score be 1-1 and we?d need the best out of three? It?s a can of worms civilservant and begs the question when is a vote not a vote?

JoeLeg said: ?...What I don?t like is stuff that veers into morally dubious territory, and your post does just that...? JoeLeg, you can over analyse what was a factual statement by me. We can?t draw any firm conclusions from the pictures because we don?t know who these people were so I can?t answer Jenny1?s question. And (see what I?ve done there Rendel) as Rendel says there will be many BAME people who support a People?s Vote. All we can say, to use a trendy Americanism, is the ?optics? aren?t doing the second vote cause any favours. What intrigues me, is what do the marchers think they would be voting on? What will be the questions? Will it be binary or will there be three or four questions? What if it?s a no-deal. I presume they think one of the questions will be to stay in the EU. But many leavers would vote against a ?Brino? deal but not to stay in the EU. We could all be arguing about the questions for a second vote for years and few people will be happy with the result.

Get out of bed on the wrong side this morning Rendel? Tell you what, let?s play a game that gives me hours of fun - it might cheer you up. Google People?s Vote March and look at the hundreds of pictures from newspapers, TV and agencies etc for the marches in the summer, at the Labour Party Conference and yesterday?s well-attended turnout. Have a magnifying glass to hand. The game is called ?spot the non-white face? I spotted about half a dozen non-white faces yesterday which was an improvement on the previous two. What conclusions can we draw from this?

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > JoeLeg Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I really try hard not to actively hate people, > as > > it?s such a waste of energy, but Kate Hoey is > such > > an unpleasant individual, actively abusing her > > position, that she really makes me fume. > > Just give her your contempt - one of my favourite > quotes from Casablanca: "You despise me, don't you > Rick?" "Well I probably would if I gave it any > thought." > > She is a pretty unpleasant character though I > agree, a bigoted right-wing libertarian somehow > still hypocritically drawing down a very nice wage > as a Labour MP. Please explain further, why is she unpleasant etc?

Cheer up dbboy, things aren?t that bad. You mentioned ?...Europe is laughing at the UK and rightly so, and guess what, they will continue to do so until this sorry mess is sorted out...? Three points here: Literature often portrays people who laugh at fools as the foolish ones - the fool is the one with wisdom. An example of the above is the (preposterous, totally unacceptable) back up to the back up in perpetuity/ border in the Irish Sea. If the EU doesn?t drop this absurd demand there?ll be a no-deal and guess what - the hard border they are pretending to prevent will then necessarily have to be imposed by the EU. Makes Shakespeare?s Feste in Twelfth Night look like the wise King Solomon. It?s not in the EU?s interest to sort this out favourably or otherwise. They want to keep us tied (kerching kerching) otherwise the house of cards will fall. Italexit anyone?

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "The diplomat added: ?The truth is? we have > clarity now, actually, more clarity than we had in > Salzburg. What we have found out in the process > leading to this meeting on Wednesday is that it is > not going to be so easy to find a deal between the > EU and the UK.? > Translation: We?ve taken the p*ss a bit too far this time by asking the UK to dismantle itself so that we can keep stuffing our coffers

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > JoeLeg Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I only count eight, but your point stands. > > Did you count beginning a sentence with a > conjunction? It can be perfectly acceptable to start a sentence with the conjunction ?and? these days despite what I was taught at school. My bugbear is the current trend for many people being interviewed to start their answer to a question with the stabiliser ?so?.

I think you and the Guardian are grasping at straws here Rendel. If you were to add up every article, discussion, tweet, text and opinion expressed in the run up to the referendum you?d find every opinion under the Sun was represented from all quarters, US, Russia, Iran, Islamic State, not to mention 27 EU members. Is social media potentially damaging to democracies? Yes, given that it fragments people into silos and uses algorithms to feed you information it decides you want. If you rely on Twitter, Facebook or the Guardian to get your news you are ill-informed. What malign forces are encouraging a People?s Vote? Bet you don?t see an article purporting to examine that in the Guardian

?...Overall the report breaks little new ground in terms of fresh evidence but says the picture remains incomplete.? I?ve never met anyone who watches RT or Sputnik and trying to guess how these stations and US Twitter accounts influenced the vote is no more scientific than reading tea leaves.

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > keano77 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > DR and JL > > > > The ruskies want to weaken the EU as well. > They?re > > not daft. A multi-pronged approach. > > > > If I was asked to help Russia to sow discord (a > > sort of Mr Blobby edits the Sun away day) then > a > > simple back of an envelope strategy would > > include: > > > > - help remainers try to overturn the referendum > > result > > Ah, so effectively anyone supporting a second > referendum is helping Russia undermine our > country? Golly, it all seems so obvious now you > say it... > > In fact, Russia has both openly and covertly > supported Brexit: > https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/10/russ > ian-influence-brexit-vote-detailed-us-senate-repor > t That?s very silly of you Rendel. The article you cite does not support open or covert support by Russia for Brexit ?...This opacity, the report suggests, ?may have enabled Russian-related money to be directed with insufficient scrutiny to various UK political actors?. ?Investigative journalists have also raised questions about the sources of sudden and possibly illicit wealth that may have been directed to support the Brexit ?Leave? campaign.? May, possibly and May is all supposition. What was open and overt was a US President interceding on behalf of a no vote. What monetary value would you put on that and why didn?t the electoral commission raise that issue? Further, given the fiasco of the Kavanaugh/Ford circus recently, the Democrats on the Senate are hardly to be taken seriously. Edited for spelling

diable rouge Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > keano77 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > - help remainers try to overturn the referendum > > result > > But if successful that would be a massive positive > effect on the EU if the UK doesn't Brexit. The > russki's want to weaken and undermine the EU and > NATO, not strengthen them... Possibly DR, but it would fracture democracy in Britain.

DR and JL The ruskies want to weaken the EU as well. They?re not daft. A multi-pronged approach. If I was asked to help Russia to sow discord (a sort of Mr Blobby edits the Sun away day) then a simple back of an envelope strategy would include: - help remainers try to overturn the referendum result - help the Visegard group?s gripes against the EU - support the boat people to increase tensions in Southern Europe - support Varadkar on the border issue and make him feel important - support Italy?s populist government - support Catalan independence All this before lunchtime

Think about it JohnL. If the ruskies wanted to cause trouble they?d be helping the remainer cause to subvert the democratic result of the referendum.

The EU freeloaders must have been disappointed the tune wasn?t Abba?s Money Money Money