Jump to content

Recommended Posts

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Think it's a bit late unfortunately.



Surely it s late but i believe it still can influence Brexit

Leavers won and i respect it but still there is half of the country that voted to remain..still a percentage of the leavers perhaps did not want a hard brexit..and still I think it will be very good to remind all of this to the whom represents this country.

This Person elected or not elected still works for the whole country not for half of it..

Also it might be good for the image of this country in europe and world wide if not for the way we do brexit.

Lots of people start believing that people of UK are ONLY the one at the football couple of days ago insulting the germans and chanting NAZI songs

I know there is another half of this country. let s show it to everybody..

thanx

robbin Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Ha ha ha!

>

> You do know there was a referendum on this? Last

> year.


There was a vote in 1972 too, but it didn't stop people campaigning every year since to leave.


So what's your point?

Sorry titch but I seem to remember you made that point before on another thread. The referendum you refer to was in June 1975 (two and a half years after the UK had joined the European Community). There was an overwhelming yes vote of more than 67%.


Unfortunately the current EU is a very different beast to the economic trading bloc people voted to join 42 years ago, hence Brexit.

Yes, but Juncker is a deluded old geezer who is way past his sell by date. It may be correct that the EU has been blamed for (some) of Britain's ills that it had no part in, but he's just trying to distract from the obvious point that in a haze (whether of booze or smug overconfidence, makes no difference) he's led the EU down the wrong road of being a federalised super-state, without the member states being capable of being joined together in that way (at least in the foreseeable future) and without the proper informed consent of their populations. It might suit one or two member states, but that's it.


He balls'd it up as much as anyone else by sticking two fingers up at Cameron (with Cameron's ridiculous two day 're-negotiation') which sent a loud message to the electorate here that we could go and swivel so far as the unelected EU leadership were concerned! The backlash to that and his other policies was Brexit.


I didn't particularly want Brexit (although I never believed the scare stories about the sky falling in), but I reckon its pretty obvious that old arrogant alleged p*ss-head played a major role in our departure from his version of the EU. I reckon he has quite a bit to answer for - he's done the EU no favours and ought to have had the self awareness and decency to resign after the Brexit vote, given the seriousness of his failure. But, given he's not accountable to any electorate, I suppose it's no surprise he's decided that's not a course he needs to take. Therein may lie a clue to part of the problem.

I passionately believe that Brexit is a huge mistake and am still very depressed about it but unfortunately this march won't make a blind bit of difference. Even if vast numbers turn up, the media will underplay it, particularly the BBC I'd imagine, bearing in mind how they've been criticised for bias (unfairly criticised IMO.)


Hats off to anyone going but sadly this horse has bolted.

So we are to leave the EU, but there after, what did people actually vote for. And once the shine of sticking it to the EU is gone, then what. A country where roughly half the people got some of what they think they voted for, in leaving the EU, box ticked.


But the rest of it, the bit where the vote emboldened the government to take advantages you'd not actually consented too, in a political landscape that meant there wasn't a party left in any state to oppose the government, one that takes it as their right to do, and are doing as they wish. And that wish to keep thier own party in power and together at any cost, including the cost to our country, shocks me to the core.


Along with that, the other half of the population who didn't vote for any part of this, now watching the country they too love, take a direction they'd never dreamt it would lurch to. What does that combination of wants leave us left with. Not unity I imagine, and add to that Scottish, Irish and other division and separations that may come.


I'm not a pessimist in general, I'm not a gambler either. However, this high stakes cocking around unnerves me. It unnerves me that the unchallenged 'will of the people' schtick is the biggest misuse of power, where the real will of the many is ignored and derided.


Good luck to you, and me and us. Tho I feel we'll be needing more than luck to see us through. We'll need trust,engagement and selflessness, and all that's in short supply from what I can see.


So yes, lets march. Where to tho?

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
  • Latest Discussions

    • Hi - I posted a request for some help with a stuck door and possible leaky roof. I had responses from Lukasz at Look_as.com and Pawel at Sublime Builders. I don't see any/many reviews - has anyone used either person?  Could use a recommendation rather then just being contact by the tradespeople... Many Thanks 
    • I'm a bit worried by your sudden involvement on this Forum.  The former Prince Andrew is now Andrew Mountbatten Windsor Mountbatten in an anglicisation of Von Battenburg adopted by that branch of our Royal Family in 1917 due to anti-German sentiment. Another anglicisation could be simply Battenburg as in the checker board cake.  So I surmise that your are Andrew Battenburg, aka Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and that you have infiltrated social media so that the country can put the emphasis on Mandelson ather than yourself.  Bit of a failure. I don't expect an answer from police custody.  
    • We had John fit our PLYKEA kitchen (IKEA cabinets with custom doors) and would happily recommend him and Gabi to anyone. Gabi handled all communication and was brilliant throughout — responsive and happy to answer questions however detailed. John is meticulous, cares about the small details, and was a pleasure to have in the house. The carpentry required for the custom doors was done to a high standard, and he even refinished the plumbing under the sink to sit better with the new cabinets — a small touch that made a real difference. They were happy to return and tie up a few things that couldn't be finished in the time, which we appreciated. No hesitations recommending them.
    • Not sure about that. Rockets seems to have (rightly in my view) identified two key motivating elements in Mcash's defection: anger at his previous (arguably shabby) treatment and a (linked) desire to trash the Labour party, nationally and locally. The defection, timed for maximum damage, combined with the invective and moral exhibitionism of his statement counts as rather more than a "hissy fit".  I would add a third motivation of political ambition: it's not inconceivable that he has his eye on the Dulwich & West Norwood seat which is predicted to go Green.  James Barber was indulging in typical LibDem sleight of hand, claiming that Blair introduced austerity to *councils* before the coalition. This is a kind of sixth form debating point. From 1997-1999 Labour broadly stuck to Tory spending totals, meaning there was limited growth in departmental spending, including local govt grants. However local government funding rose substantially in the Noughties, especially in education and social care. It is a matter of record that real-terms local authority spending increased in the Blair / Brown years overall. So he's manifestly wrong (or only right if the focus is on 1997-1999, which would be a bizarre focus and one he didn't include in his claim) but he wasn't claiming Blair introduced austerity more widely. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...