Read the article. Read it until you’ve understood it. There is a plan.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] Brexit
- Thread starter KingstonSeagull
- Start date
Read the article. Read it until you’ve understood it. There is a plan.
For those who believe that democracy is some infallible force for good (which it is in theory but not strictly in reality) I urge you to take the time to watch the documentary Welcome to Leith to see for yourselves how democracy can be used against itself to achieve malevolent aims. In the case of the US town of Leith we see how a well organised, well funded group of Neo-Nazis used the democratic process to gain a majority in a town and turn it into a fascist stronghold. All perfectly legally and using the democratic framework that already existed. It’s both fascinating and frightening how easily it was orchestrated.
Some foretell that Islamic extremists are taking over the west. I say this is a smokescreen created by the far right to distract from their plan of gaining a majority in the European Parliament.
Not your Tommy Robinsons but well organised, capable, well funded, intelligent right wing politicians who know how to work the democratic system to their advantage. Will we still be saying it’s the will of the people and must be enacted? And for the record I’m not insinuating that leave voters desire this outcome but I do think they are being used to facilitate this plan and I think they will regret being manipulated.
Am I talking bollocks? I hope so but let’s not forget the old adage ...The greatest trick the Devil played was convincing the world he didn’t exist.
Some foretell that Islamic extremists are taking over the west. I say this is a smokescreen created by the far right to distract from their plan of gaining a majority in the European Parliament.
Not your Tommy Robinsons but well organised, capable, well funded, intelligent right wing politicians who know how to work the democratic system to their advantage. Will we still be saying it’s the will of the people and must be enacted? And for the record I’m not insinuating that leave voters desire this outcome but I do think they are being used to facilitate this plan and I think they will regret being manipulated.
Am I talking bollocks? I hope so but let’s not forget the old adage ...The greatest trick the Devil played was convincing the world he didn’t exist.
Last edited:
portslade seagull
Well-known member
Still at it I see. Not sure how the leave team which were cobbled together at the last minute by Cammers could come up with a credible plan given he gave them so little time to achieve it before his glorious victory.
ManOfSussex
We wunt be druv
But despite that you still voted leave and it's all the arrogant Etonian's fault.
This whole subject has gone beyond depressing now.
I was reading the leader in The Economist, which correctly (in my view) points out that there are now only 3 courses of action we can take from this point, and they are all dreadful. One is to quit on WTO terms, one is a soft Brexit assuming TM's Chequers plan (or whatever is agreed after negotiations with the EU), and one is to let the people decide between b) and c) in a second referendum. The Economist favours the referendum option (which it argues should be binary between in or out, as people don't like referendums with more than two choices). They recognise that all outcomes are lose-lose from this point, because even it's preferred course of action leaves a bitter, divided nation.
Personally, I'd rather we took the soft Brexit option. Much as I'd prefer us to remain in the EU, another referendum could be disastrous - but not nearly as bad as a no-deal Brexit. I think a soft Brexit is the least damaging as it provides the illusion of freedom and intolerance to racist simpletons like PPF (especially if we can grab some semblance of control over immigration), but we maintain our trading links to the EU, something we've spent 40 years building up.
It really would have helped if the Tories had spent time deciding what aspects of the EU people most objected to BEFORE the vote. It would also have helped if the leave camp had come up with some sort of plan as to how we were going to leave. Neither was enacted, and things are an absolute mess now for these two reasons. There is no justice in the world if the Tories aren't absolutely annihilated in the next general election for what they've done to this country, especially when you consider how the Lib Dems were punished over student grants.
I was reading the leader in The Economist, which correctly (in my view) points out that there are now only 3 courses of action we can take from this point, and they are all dreadful. One is to quit on WTO terms, one is a soft Brexit assuming TM's Chequers plan (or whatever is agreed after negotiations with the EU), and one is to let the people decide between b) and c) in a second referendum. The Economist favours the referendum option (which it argues should be binary between in or out, as people don't like referendums with more than two choices). They recognise that all outcomes are lose-lose from this point, because even it's preferred course of action leaves a bitter, divided nation.
Personally, I'd rather we took the soft Brexit option. Much as I'd prefer us to remain in the EU, another referendum could be disastrous - but not nearly as bad as a no-deal Brexit. I think a soft Brexit is the least damaging as it provides the illusion of freedom and intolerance to racist simpletons like PPF (especially if we can grab some semblance of control over immigration), but we maintain our trading links to the EU, something we've spent 40 years building up.
It really would have helped if the Tories had spent time deciding what aspects of the EU people most objected to BEFORE the vote. It would also have helped if the leave camp had come up with some sort of plan as to how we were going to leave. Neither was enacted, and things are an absolute mess now for these two reasons. There is no justice in the world if the Tories aren't absolutely annihilated in the next general election for what they've done to this country, especially when you consider how the Lib Dems were punished over student grants.
[TWEET]1022981237395402752[/TWEET]
A few weeks ago Dominic Cummings, who was the Chair of Vote Leave, addressed this by saying "we never came up with a plan because doing so meant we wouldn't have won". Basically because they were ambiguous they could let people attach any vision of Leave they wanted onto the idea and as such scrape over the line. Had they set out what Leave position they wanted, they would have alienated some Leave supporters into either voting Remain or not voting at all. George Galloway and Nigel Farage didn't both vote Leave for the same reason, after all.
The point is not that the army would be doing it. The points are;
1. Brexit was sold as something good, when the reality is it is anything but.
2. This is all a voluntary action, no country in history has chosen to deploy it's own military to help the public through it's own actions.
[TWEET]1023813434704576513[/TWEET]
Hampster Gull
New member
- Dec 22, 2010
- 13,462
10% of the country think that the government, the party who want to leave the EU, are doing a good job. Next election can’t come soon enough
Garry Nelson's teacher
Well-known member
Yes: I'm beginning to think that we've reached some sort of tipping point...………….
Two Professors
Two Mad Professors
Two Professors
Two Mad Professors
Bi-Lateral means between two parties.You have lost the plot.Was it you up the Broadway throwing axes at the police?
One good thing though is with Boris no longer Foreign Secretary at least the rest of the world can stop laughing at this departments gaffes or can they
Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt mistakenly referred to his wife as Japanese during a visit to Beijing to discuss post-Brexit trade deals between the UK and China.
Mr Hunt's wife is actually Chinese.
Easy mistake to make Jeremy after all .........oh dear
The Tories the gift that just keeps on giving would be funny if the fact was that they are in charge of Brexit!
Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt mistakenly referred to his wife as Japanese during a visit to Beijing to discuss post-Brexit trade deals between the UK and China.
Mr Hunt's wife is actually Chinese.
Easy mistake to make Jeremy after all .........oh dear
The Tories the gift that just keeps on giving would be funny if the fact was that they are in charge of Brexit!
Klaas
I've changed this
- Nov 1, 2017
- 2,565
Is that true? What a bizarre mistake to make, I mean, if he was in Japan maybe, just maybe I could understand it. A bit.
Baldseagull
Well-known member
Yes, the two parties are the EU and GB, not Germany and GB. Stop being a bellend. We know he can't be talking about GB and Germany, because as a member state of the EU, Germany can't do bi-lateral trade deals independently, leavers really should know this by now.
I'd imagine that was quite a "frosty" flight home...
Two Professors
Two Mad Professors
So it wasn't you throwing axes then?The German Foreign Minister was talking to the British Foreign Minister,so how can either of them be talking on behalf of the EU,you bell-end?Bi-lateral would in no way refer to Germany talking about the EU,as the talks were about German/UK relations post-Brexit.The Foreign Minister might give you a clue there.