Brexit Wins- UK to Leave the EU

  • Thread starter Thread starter House
  • Start date Start date
mmm....shiney! said:
Big A.D. said:
mmm....shiney! said:
Now as far as Scotland is concerned, they should leave the UK but they should also do what the Brits are going to do and leave the EU Empire.

The Scots would get absolutely no benefit from leaving both the UK and the EU. If they're required to chose, they'd be better off in the EU and would likely vote to remain.

The whole of Scotland has only has about 2/3rds the population of Greater London. Any extra business they pick up has a much bigger multiplier effect.


Not that I don't appreciate wanting to give a big middle finger to David Cameron and the bureaucrats in Brussels, but doing it via the Brexit referendum was a really dumb move.

What price do you put on independence and sovereignty? The centralisation of political and economic power should be avoided at all cost, for the same reason I'd be happy to see Australia de-federalise or at least the authority to tax incomes returned to the States.

There's nothing dumb about a public show of defiance against their political masters and their crony capitalist friends, you may disagree with the outcome, but it's not dumb.

Couldn't have put it better myself,the leave vote was about getting back control of our country & becoming masters of our own destiny/taking a risk. If you take a good look at mainland Europe & have 1/2 a brain you will see there are massive problems there all brought on by the EU bureaucrats. If things over the next couple of years aren't too rosy so be it, the electorate who could be bothered to vote did & the result was clear. Bye bye Brussels, the elite in the EU are now terrified other countries will follow suite & are likely to try & make things difficult for the UK.

If they do so be it we have overcome worse than the unelected dictators in the EU before & will do so again.
 
(Not mine)

Edit: modified to avoid causing undue offence.

BIrxxiG.jpg
 
Big A.D. said:
If you want to see a truly sovereign nation, check out North Korea. Everyone else accepts that giving up some power opens the doors to more co-operation and better outcomes for everyone. Its involves give and take.

Sovereign nation doesn't mean automatically democracy. Matter of fact apart from the EU, North Korea is also one of those regions where no election is held for the topmost positions.
Giving up right to vote, or to disagree in any form is one of the reasons the EU is dying. Sooner a country leaves now better their prospect in the future once the entire EU project falls apart.
 
HoldMeTender said:
Invoking Jo Cox there might possibly be perceived to be in poor taste...

Absolutely disgraceful the remain campaign using that poor woman's sad demise to further the remain vote.

But the electorate saw through that sick attempt to garner votes for the remain camp.

Up until her murder virtually no one had even heard of Jo Cox & now the referendum is over she has completely dropped off the radar, makes me sick that remain would stoop so low.

Anyway no point getting wound up about that we won & I'm looking forward to the next few years & beyond with optimism,I'm sick of the sados of the remain camp & institutions like the BOE etc trying to talk the country down.

Job done lets go forward & get on with things.
 
Caput Lupinum said:
Big A.D. said:
I'm aware of what the numbers were, I just don't think a lot of the Leave voters realized what they were voting for when they cast their ballots. If the calls for a second referendum get up, I seriously doubt the Leave vote would be carried again. Especially since such an important issue should really have required a super-majority in the first place.

So just keep having referendums until you get the result you want?

This question was posed to Cameron had the remain vote only won by a small margin would he entertain the thought of having a second referendum and have a sup-majority with at least a 60% remain victory and he said no. The parameters for the referendum were known well before the vote. Just sour grapes

You see, that is your problem right there AD, YOU think people are stupid unless they agree with your perception of reality, as do a lot of progressive types. OH' I don't think people really knew what they were voting for, Bullshit! They wanted a country that they live in to decide for ITSELF what it's future is and not some unelected Bank appointed unrepresentative oligarchy deciding their future for them. I doubt you would be making the same argument if the vote was remain, no doubt you would be reveling in the fact that the right had had their noses rubbed in the result and a call for any new referendum on that basis would be rubbished.

Face the fact M8, the People have spoken and it is what it is. Wave good bye to your socialist experiment, it was always doomed to failure.
 
HoldMeTender said:
...as was drooling over assault weapons in the Orlando thread...


I think you have that backwards like most progressive libs. The progressive libs will come out like cockroaches at night and jump on a tragic shooting to immediately start pushing gun control for the masses. This move by the progressives will be countered by 2nd amendment supporters who wish to respond to the gun grabbers' arguments with their own, which to no surprise will be to support the right to own guns.

I doubt any gun supporters were out celebrating the shooting or drooling over assault weapons because of the killings. I can't say the same for some progressive libs. I would say some progressive libs were DROOLING over the mass killings because it gave them a platform to push for gun control (which is really control of the people, not guns). The progressive libs didn't seem to notice who the shooter was or what ideology led to the killings. I've yet to see a gun on its own jump up and start killing people.

PS Why don't we ban cars to stop drunk driving? Or ban alcohol to stop drunk driving? Your logic is no different than this.

Just my opinion.

Jim
 
I'm familiar with your arguments Jim. You are quick to generalise and accuse others of harbouring hatred, but a lot of your posts are full of insults and inflammatory language.

As for your assessment of my logic, I respectfully suggest you have that wrong. Not least because you don't know what my positions are because I haven't expressed them fully on this forum. One reason I don't is because this is a trading platform and I don't want to poison the well.

There might be some sickos who celebrate mass killings bacause they think it reinforces their stance (possibly pro- or anti-gun) but I am not one of them and nor is anyone else on this forum as far as I can tell. Nothing is gained by looking at the worst element (real or imagined) in any debate and judging the entire debate (or 'other side') based on that.

My only point was that I thought (in my opinion, as you are so wont to say) that it was in poor taste to discuss and praise guns in a thread related to the gun deaths of dozens of innocent people. Agree with that or disagree, that is all I said above. The context was in relation to a quote (since removed) seemingly mocking murdered UK MP Jo Cox.

Let's keep it civil.
 
A petition calling for another EU referendum has passed 1.75 million signatures.

"We the undersigned call upon HM Government to implement a rule that if the remain or leave vote is less than 60% based a turnout less than 75% there should be another referendum," the petition reads. Overall, the turnout in the EU referendum on 23 June was 73 per cent, and 51.8 per cent of voters went for Leave.

The petition has been so popular it briefly crashed the government website, and is now the biggest petition in the site's history.

After 10,000 signatures, the government has to respond to an official petition. After 100,000 signatures, it must be considered for a debate in parliament.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politic...rendum-petition-passes-175-million-signatures
 
Bet a ZILLION that no petition would have been suggested, or tolerated, if the IN vote had prevailed.

50% plus ONE vote would have been enough. The LAST thing the socialists want is a Democracy they cannot control, as Stalin observed.

Poor losers!

OC
 
Old Codger said:
Bet a ZILLION that no petition would have been suggested, or tolerated, if the IN vote had prevailed.

50% plus ONE vote would have been enough. The LAST thing the socialists want is a Democracy they cannot control, as Stalin observed.

Poor losers!

OC

When and where can I collect my zilion?

"Nigel Farage warns today he would fight for a second referendum on Britain in Europe if the remain campaign won by a narrow margin next month.
.
.
.
In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. " - Farage

Source: Nigel Farage wants second referendum
 
"Nigel Farage warns today he would fight for a second referendum on Britain in Europe if the remain campaign won by a narrow margin next month..
In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. " - Farage"



It seems to me that the above simply confirms what i have said.

IF 'remain' had won, then THEY, the 'Remains', would not accept a new Referendum. 50%+1 vote would be unchallenged! Farage may have hypothetically wanted it, but he would not have got it!

OC
 
If the EU is such a unified entity and Britain was crazy to leave it then why are France, Finland, Austria, Hungary, Holland and Portugal now discussing their own referendums on leaving the glorious Union too?
 
John Pilger on the real story:

The majority vote by Britons to leave the European Union was an act of raw democracy. Millions of ordinary people refused to be bullied, intimidated and dismissed with open contempt by their presumed betters in the major parties, the leaders of the business and banking oligarchy and the media.

This was, in great part, a vote by those angered and demoralized by the sheer arrogance of the apologists for the "Remain" campaign and the dismemberment of a socially just civil life in Britain. The last bastion of the historic reforms of 1945, the National Health Service, has been so subverted by Tory and Labour-supported privateers it is fighting for its life.

A forewarning came when the Treasurer, George Osborne, the embodiment of both Britain's ancient regime and the banking mafia in Europe, threatened to cut 30 billion from public services if people voted the wrong way; it was blackmail on a shocking scale.

Immigration was exploited in the campaign with consummate cynicism, not only by populist politicians from the lunar right, but by Labour politicians drawing on their own venerable tradition of promoting and nurturing racism, a symptom of corruption not at the bottom but at the top. The reason millions of refugees have fled the Middle East - first Iraq, now Syria - are the invasions and imperial mayhem of Britain, the United States, France, the European Union and Nato. Before that, there was the willful destruction of Yugoslavia. Before that, there was the theft of Palestine and the imposition of Israel.

The pith helmets may have long gone, but the blood has never dried. A nineteenth century contempt for countries and peoples, depending on their degree of colonial usefulness, remains a centerpiece of modern "globalization", with its perverse socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor: its freedom for capital and denial of freedom to labor; its perfidious politicians and politicized civil servants.

All this has now come home to Europe, enriching the likes of Tony Blair and impoverishing and disempowering millions. On 23 June, the British said no more.

The most effective propagandists of the "European ideal" have not been the far right, but an insufferably patrician class for whom metropolitan London is the United Kingdom. Its leading members see themselves as liberal, enlightened, cultivated tribunes of the 21st century zeitgeist, even "cool". What they really are is a bourgeoisie with insatiable consumerist tastes and ancient instincts of their own superiority. In their house paper, the Guardian, they have gloated, day after day, at those who would even consider the EU profoundly undemocratic, a source of social injustice and a virulent extremism known as "neoliberalism."

The aim of this extremism is to install a permanent, capitalist theocracy that ensures a two-thirds society, with the majority divided and indebted, managed by a corporate class, and a permanent working poor. In Britain today, 63 per cent of poor children grow up in families where one member is working. For them, the trap has closed. More than 600,000 residents of Britain's second city, Greater Manchester, are, reports a study, "experiencing the effects of extreme poverty" and 1.6 million are slipping into penury.

Little of this social catastrophe is acknowledged in the bourgeois controlled media, notably the Oxbridge dominated BBC. During the referendum campaign, almost no insightful analysis was allowed to intrude upon the clichd hysteria about "leaving Europe", as if Britain was about to be towed in hostile currents somewhere north of Iceland.

On the morning after the vote, a BBC radio reporter welcomed politicians to his studio as old chums. "Well," he said to "Lord" Peter Mandelson, the disgraced architect of Blairism, "why do these people want it so badly?" The "these people" are the majority of Britons.

The wealthy war criminal Tony Blair remains a hero of the Mandelson "European" class, though few will say so these days. The Guardian once described Blair as "mystical" and has been true to his "project" of rapacious war. The day after the vote, the columnist Martin Kettle offered a Brechtian solution to the misuse of democracy by the masses. "Now surely we can agree referendums are bad for Britain", said the headline over his full-page piece. The "we" was unexplained but understood - just as "these people" is understood. "The referendum has conferred less legitimacy on politics, not more," wrote Kettle. " ... the verdict on referendums should be a ruthless one. Never again."

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/op...-British-Said-No-to-Europe-20160625-0022.html
 
southerncross said:
Caput Lupinum said:
Big A.D. said:
I'm aware of what the numbers were, I just don't think a lot of the Leave voters realized what they were voting for when they cast their ballots. If the calls for a second referendum get up, I seriously doubt the Leave vote would be carried again. Especially since such an important issue should really have required a super-majority in the first place.

So just keep having referendums until you get the result you want?

This question was posed to Cameron had the remain vote only won by a small margin would he entertain the thought of having a second referendum and have a sup-majority with at least a 60% remain victory and he said no. The parameters for the referendum were known well before the vote. Just sour grapes

You see, that is your problem right there AD, YOU think people are stupid unless they agree with your perception of reality, as do a lot of progressive types. OH' I don't think people really knew what they were voting for, Bullshit! They wanted a country that they live in to decide for ITSELF what it's future is and not some unelected Bank appointed unrepresentative oligarchy deciding their future for them. I doubt you would be making the same argument if the vote was remain, no doubt you would be reveling in the fact that the right had had their noses rubbed in the result and a call for any new referendum on that basis would be rubbished.

Face the fact M8, the People have spoken and it is what it is. Wave good bye to your socialist experiment, it was always doomed to failure.

Yes, thank you for pointing out that the "Leave" vote won.

What nobody has really been able to explain is precisely how the UK is going to be better off outside of the EU, other than "well, there's immigrants and stuff and we couldn't stop them otherwise because of Brussels".

It's not stupid to want more of a say in how things are run, but all this means is that Britain wins with right to bicker amongst itself about the people who come into the country while all the businesses and capital are busy relocating to Europe.
 
^ is not wanting to be under the rule of the dumb EU dictatorship not a good reason? They done EU nations a great job of allowing all them foreigner freeloader scums in.
 
350 million per month, would do it for me !
that alone is in no way any form of sovereignty.
 
Back
Top