The Berxit lies and betrayals

[woolley]

1 hour ago, pongo said:

Dream on old people.

The UK is simply changing its relationship with the EU. A relationship which was always semi-detached.

After Britain officially leaves next year the government and the EU will be free to quietly come up with a sensible business friendly outcome. Because the anti EU argument will no longer have any tangible focus. It will be business as usual. It will mean continuing to track the EU but no longer being so well represented. Most likely it will be more or less Norway except in name.

This is offensive and ageist. It is not only old people who voted Leave. It has been dressed up as such by the establishment and the media with their spurious polling.

However, perhaps those who have been around for a while and seen the EU in its true colours have saved their younger relatives from themselves in extricating them from the EU nightmare that some of them have been brainwashed into thinking is benign and good for their future. It isn't.

[woolley]

2 hours ago, John Wright said:

So you don’t believe in democracy then? Only if the results suit your views, when they must be stuck to and can never be challenged, or voted down, or a different result. Sounds like the very reason we need the EU and the ECHR.

I'll grant you that the EU has form in asking the same question over again until it gets the answer it likes. Yes, it could happen, but there would be trouble in all kinds of ways.

[woolley]

2 hours ago, Freggyragh said:

The U.K. has to stay in the single market and follow all the rules and regulations of trade set by the EU (with zero input from the U.K.) or unilaterally rip up the Good Friday Agreement. Of course, that means that the U.K. cannot make trade agreements with other countries, or risk physical barriers and searches to stop hormone-fed beef or cheap Chinese steel crossing borders. It will have to pay for the bureaucracy of the EU necessary to regulate trade, but will have no influence, no one employed by the EU and will not host any EU bodies, but also have to pay all by itself for all diplomatic trade missions and treaty negotiators. The immigration system will remain as it was - up to Britain to sort out, which means it will be whatever business interests want.

It isn’t taking back control. Its losing control. I can’t see business opportunities for anyone, just cheaper industrial food shipped in from half a world away. There are political opportunities for nationalist and ideological movements in Brexit, but nothing for pragmatism or prosperity. 

The first sentence is factually wrong so the rest does not follow at all.

[woolley]

3 hours ago, John Wright said:

 

Yes, NATO and mutually assured destruction may have stopped war between east and west,  but had nothing to do with stabilisation of Spain, Greece, Portugal or  Central Europe, the Baltic or Balkan states post dictatorship 

Ridiculous. Of course it did. NATO was and is a force for military co-operation throughout Europe against a common perceived enemy. Most major European states are members and ex-Eastern bloc countries joined as the Soviet influence retreated. In working together in that common cause under US leadership there was never any opportunity for local belligerence. Everyone was too concerned about the red menace in the East.

Both Greece and Turkey are members of NATO. That can stop them coming to blows. NATO packs a punch and has credibility. If they were not members of NATO and they started warring, what do you think the EU would do? I'll tell you. Absolutely nothing. It's a paper tiger and your European dream is a dangerous fantasy because it blinds the gullible to dangers they believe have been consigned to history. Our ancient  nations of Europe need to be strong and proud. Not hollowed out and leveled down by a central bureaucracy which has no long term future.

[The Old Git]

6 hours ago, woolley said:

You sure about that? I don't think so.

From my own experience, yes. 

[Freggyragh]

9 hours ago, woolley said:

The first sentence is factually wrong so the rest does not follow at all.

Keep up Woolley, it was re-confirmed by the U.K. and EU back in December:

In the absence of agreed solutions the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and Customs Union which, now and in the future, support North-South co-operation, the all-island economy, and the protection of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement. 

Full alignment with the rules of not just the Internal Market, but the Customs Union as well (so less divergence than Norway!) and a triple lock of conditions to ensure compliance. Signed, sealed and delivered by David Davis. 

I know you don’t deal in facts, (or, ‘pedantry’ as you call it), but would care to explain your comment?

[woody2]

8 minutes ago, Freggyragh said:

Keep up Woolley, it was re-confirmed by the U.K. and EU back in December:

In the absence of agreed solutions the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and Customs Union which, now and in the future, support North-South co-operation, the all-island economy, and the protection of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement. 

Full alignment with the rules of not just the Internal Market, but the Customs Union as well (so less divergence than Norway!) and a triple lock of conditions to ensure compliance. Signed, sealed and delivered by David Davis. 

I know you don’t deal in facts, (or, ‘pedantry’ as you call it), but would care to explain your comment?

ffs dumbo this is what the eu wants, nothing to do with the final deal, its not legally binding....... 

[woody2]

12 hours ago, John Wright said:

Please enlighten me where I’ve gone wrong with 4, signed in 1950, came into force 1953, UK allowed individual right of petition ( compulsory jurisdiction ) in 1966

i was referring to tony blairs ham-fisted legislation......

not disagreeing about the history of the ehrc........ 

[Rog]

11 hours ago, Freggyragh said:

I’m just stunned that anyone on Manx forums could confuse the two large islands of Britain and Ireland. That’s a level of thick-as-f*cking-pig-shit I’ve never really encountered before. 

- In Barrie’s case an acknowledged ‘senior moment’ from one of the most educated and erudite posters on MF - but Rog?!?!? do you even know where the Isle of Man is?

 

 

 

The island of Ireland provides the land area for two totally different countries.  Eire is one, Northern Ireland is another. Northern Ireland, somewhat similar to Wales and Scotland has limited devolved government though Westminster is the ultimate government.  My sincere hope is that as a part of BREXIT a strong physical border is constructed between Eire and Northern Ireland if for no other reason than to protect the BRITISH population from any further attacks and invasions from Eire.

You may gather that I am a strong supporter of the DUP, their aims and ambitions even though I live far away from "rump" Ulster.  

[woody2]

14 hours ago, John Wright said:

Let’s analyse that, allegation, lie by lie.

1. UK never surrendered its sovereignty. It shared it in agreed areas. It will have to do so in any future treaties, free trade agreements, military alliances, not just with Europe, but the rest of the world. In fact it will transfer sovereignty to WTO if it doesn’t get all these hoped for free trade agreements. The fact it can withdraw shows it always retained full sovereignty.

2. We’ve always been able to control our borders within the EU. We just didn’t do it well. What makes you think Brexit will improve things.

3. We’ve not poured in billions into a corrupt EU. The Court of Auditors has signed off the EU budget year after year. The suggestion it hadn’t is untrue. Yes, there has been a cost, but the stability of Europe and the transition of ex totalitarian, military or communist regimes to Liberal Democracy is worth every penny.

4. EHCR. UK signed up in the 1950’s and agreed compulsory jurisdiction in the 1960’s. It’s not an EU institution. Brexit won’t change that. What Blair did was to give Human Rights jurisdiction to UK courts, rather than just the Strasbourg  Court. Isn’t that what brexiteers want. Jurisdiction by British Courts?

5. There’s no chance of an EU army. UK had a veto. We will still be in NATO. Of course we also have a bilateral agreement with France for the AngloFrench Expeditionary Force.

The only sovereign state that doesn’t surrender or share sovereignty is North Korea. And even it is hit by sanctions. 

 

1- uk is already a member of the wto.... uk won't have to pay eu import/export duty= massive saving

despite the uk giving actual import/export figures, the eu prefers to guesstimate costing the uk even more money

2- uk cannot control its borders, the uk can't remove who it wants......

3- the eu is corrupt, it changed its accounting procedures to get accounts past.....

5-eu has already said it wants an army.....

 

[Bobbie Bobster]

34 minutes ago, Rog said:

The island of Ireland provides the land area for two totally different countries.  Eire is one, Northern Ireland is another. Northern Ireland, somewhat similar to Wales and Scotland has limited devolved government though Westminster is the ultimate government.  My sincere hope is that as a part of BREXIT a strong physical border is constructed between Eire and Northern Ireland if for no other reason than to protect the BRITISH population from any further attacks and invasions from Eire.

You may gather that I am a strong supporter of the DUP, their aims and ambitions even though I live far away from "rump" Ulster.  

Being lectured on the geopolitics of the British Islands by someone who doesn't know the difference between GB and the UK. Priceless

[ballaughbiker]

Quote

You may gather that I am a strong supporter of the DUP

Quelle surprise

[RIchard Britten]

18 hours ago, Rog said:

I just want out of the EU and I don't give a tinkers cuss about the cost.  

Just going back to this older post of yours.

Of course you don't care what the cost is.  You and all the other old duffers most likely be dead (or beyond useful contribution) by the time cost becomes a reality.

The older generation are dead set on writing a cheque they have no intention or ability to cash, leaving it up to the younger generations to carry the can.

Old and senility are common traits of the Chickenhawk.

[Rog]

1 minute ago, RIchard Britten said:

Just going back to this older post of yours.

Of course you don't care what the cost is.  You and all the other old duffers most likely be dead (or beyond useful contribution) by the time cost becomes a reality.

The older generation are dead set on writing a cheque they have no intention or ability to cash, leaving it up to the younger generations to carry the can.

As me if I care.

[RIchard Britten]

Just now, Rog said:

As me if I care.

Why would I waste the effort.

It is common knowledge you are an emotionless husk, devoid of anything even boarding on basic human empathy.