[Politics] Brexit

[pastafarian]

You really are an argumentative bore.

cant be helped im afraid, if some of you lot continue to post utter nonsense i will continue to point out your failings.

 

[Buzzer]

So by your reckoning the queen who is a German descendant and therefore immigrant is ok to be our ruler not forgetting she has a naturalised husband who is a Greek immigrant this must be so because you infer that my questioning of he ethnicity is doubtful because you use Sadiq Khan as an example of someone who is now British?

Is it ok with you that Khan is British then ?
Was Khan born here? I honestly don't know?

So if Khan married into the royal family you would be fine with this I take it?

Lots more questions and no answers.

I'll state my position and hopefully it's clear. I think the Queen is 100% British. I've no problem with that and I've no problem with her having married a Greek/Danish chap and the future kings and queens having that ancestry. I also think Sadiq Khan is 100% British. His parents aren't but he was born and lived here all his life, he clearly self-identifies as a Brit and this is his country as much as it is mine and once again, I've absolutely no problem with that. And if he married into the Royal Family then good for him.

My issue is why you refer to the Queen as German when she was born here, so were her parents, all her grandparents too and 5 of her great-grandparents BUT you say you wouldn't refer to someone like Ian Wright as Jamaican. I genuinely don't understand why the position they hold in this country makes the slightest difference to their nationality.

 

[The Clamp]

cant be helped im afraid, if some of you lot continue to post utter nonsense i will continue to point out your failings.

Well, I suppose everyone has to have a hobby/obsession. All the best with it.

 

[Theatre of Trees]

:

Lots more questions and no answers.

I'll state my position and hopefully it's clear. I think the Queen is 100% British. I've no problem with that and I've no problem with her having married a Greek/Danish chap and the future kings and queens having that ancestry. I also think Sadiq Khan is 100% British. His parents aren't but he was born and lived here all his life, he clearly self-identifies as a Brit and this is his country as much as it is mine and once again, I've absolutely no problem with that. And if he married into the Royal Family then good for him.

My issue is why you refer to the Queen as German when she was born here, so were her parents, all her grandparents too and 5 of her great-grandparents BUT you say you wouldn't refer to someone like Ian Wright as Jamaican. I genuinely don't understand why the position they hold in this country makes the slightest difference to their nationality.

The Hanoverian dynasty traces their descent via a daughter of James I of England which now makes them Scottish.

 

[pastafarian]

Well, I suppose everyone has to have a hobby/obsession. All the best with it.

cheers....,its going awfully well at the moment.
Mind you i do have lashings of material to work from.

 

[The Clamp]

cheers....,its going awfully well at the moment.
Mind you i do have lashings of material to work from.

Ha! Fair do's.

 

[Chicken Runner61]

Lots more questions and no answers.

I'll state my position and hopefully it's clear. I think the Queen is 100% British. I've no problem with that and I've no problem with her having married a Greek/Danish chap and the future kings and queens having that ancestry. I also think Sadiq Khan is 100% British. His parents aren't but he was born and lived here all his life, he clearly self-identifies as a Brit and this is his country as much as it is mine and once again, I've absolutely no problem with that. And if he married into the Royal Family then good for him.

My issue is why you refer to the Queen as German when she was born here, so were her parents, all her grandparents too and 5 of her great-grandparents BUT you say you wouldn't refer to someone like Ian Wright as Jamaican. I genuinely don't understand why the position they hold in this country makes the slightest difference to their nationality.

To say that the queen is 100% British is stretching it - I never said Ian Wright was or was not British, the same as all the other immigrants you mention - you brought them into it to justify The queen as British.

I'm stretching it to imply the queen is German but she has German ancestry and the British have not always been completely happy with that bloodline which is why the name was changed to Windsor.

So it would seem that you are fine with people becoming British by birth and through time?

I like you think people can become British by birth and by naturalisation but it is essentially a state of mind and so is sovereignty.

It's likely that in the not to distant future the King or Queen will be of a different foreign bloodline - the idigenious subjects of the U.K. will be diluted to obscurity with or without Brexit so either things will change or the ruler will have subjects that have no ethnic bond.

What has this to do with Brexit ?? Well not much at this point now but it's a bit futile worrying that we gave our power and rights to Europe even though we have / had more in common with Europe and the tribes of Europe than we will have with a nation that will be genetically be from a mix including empire conquests across the globe. The real point being that on this basis the nation doesn't care about the ethenticity of who is divine ruler if they marry into the blue blood line.

 

[Triggaaar]

the nation has voted to leave and I respect that. I am puzzled why there is seemingly now a plan to try and do a trade deal with the corrupt and unaccountable EU though.

You don't seem to understand much.

I'm just puzzled why you want out...but now want a back door deal. I thought the future lay elsewhere....this is what I was repeatedly told.

Told by whom? Are there voices in your head?

 

[Triggaaar]

Basically the leavers fell into two camps,

The Tories just wanted the chance to repeal all EU laws which protected workers rights

UKIP and the racists wanted to stop brown people coming into our country,


None of them cared about the trade deals.

Don't forget the thickos. Oh, and the gullible. Racists, thickos, the gullible, and now those that want rid of workers' rights.

It's vitally important that we can pigeonhole those that disagree with you into an inferior group.

 

[El Presidente]

Dear me, you still on the French stuff.
You should be on Italian or German by now.........i thought you were an expert.

just goes to show.......never trust the experts.

If you've ever seen the Alpha France movies of the 70's you will realise they are peerless. Not as much close up pink as German grumble from the 80's I will concede, but for ingenuity, plot (yes, some had them) and imagination they're the best IMO.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

I'm actually close to putting you on my ignore list with Hove, Bald and Unread .... the two of you should get along famously.

do you actually think that bothers me? , says a lot about you though
regards
DR

 

[vegster]

do you actually think that bothers me? , says a lot about you though
regards
DR

I have absolutely no interest in what you think, but, I do like the thought of you and him stuck in a lift together for eternity.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

You don't seem to understand much.
Told by whom? Are there voices in your head?

Told by Davis for example. He's said that if the EU is daft enough not to give the UK access to the single market without allowing us curbs on immigration then the future will indeed be elsewhere and him and the Fox will trolley off and do deals with markets ten times bigger than the EU, simultaneously putting a tariff on BMWs and the rest which will raise huge amounts of money that he will give to the British car industry.

I don't know about David but Fox has already shown he is very good at raising vast amounts of money. Unfortunately he had to pay much of it back when he emerged as one of the stars of the MPs' expenses scandal.

 

[The Clamp]

Brexiteers wanted out of EU and now want deals done with the EU through the back door. Pretty unbelievable really. So basically we will, essentially still be a pat of the EU but with zero clout, at the mercy of the EU and all the elements of it Brexiteers sited as their reason to leave but without any power to do anything about it.
We are a part of Europe whether we like it or not, Brexit just lessens our power in the continent we are a part of. Makes one wonder what the real motivations for Leave voters was because I can't believe they are all stupid enough not to realise this. Perhaps they thought it was a price worth paying for another agenda they had.

 

[Jim in the West]

Brexiteers wanted out of EU and now want deals done with the EU through the back door. Pretty unbelievable really. So basically we will, essentially still be a pat of the EU but with zero clout, at the mercy of the EU and all the elements of it Brexiteers sited as their reason to leave but without any power to do anything about it.
We are a part of Europe whether we like it or not, Brexit just lessens our power in the continent we are a part of. Makes one wonder what the real motivations for Leave voters was because I can't believe they are all stupid enough not to realise this. Perhaps they thought it was a price worth paying for another agenda they had.

There's a good letter in today's FT which possibly hits the nail on the head - ie, the real motivation for many Leave voters was simply the chance to be heard:

Sir, David P Leader (Letters, August 5) waspishly says that supporters of Brexit may be disillusioned, dissatisfied, disappointed or dispossessed, but are not disenfranchised. He is wrong: a quarter of Brexit voters are supporters of the UK Independence party, and they are disenfranchised. Enfranchisement is not merely the right to mark a ballot paper. It means to possess rights and liberties, to be a citizen who is counted and considered and, in the UK, to be represented in parliament. These meanings are recognised in good dictionaries, and uses of the term date predate popular elections. I don’t like Ukip. I find its policies poorly thought out and prejudiced, and its rhetoric is offensive and repugnant to me. But the fact that almost 4m votes for the party result in only one MP scandalises our political system and threatens to destabilise our society. Many of Ukip’s supporters live in economic and life circumstances that have been deliberately created and exacerbated by economic policies over the past 40 years. In normal circumstances nothing they can do in a polling booth has a chance of changing that: are they not disenfranchised?

On one day in June this community saw a possibility of change, and turned out to vote in numbers that surprised the pundits. I consider the outcome bizarre, and unfortunate, and expect that my children and grandchildren will be paying the price.

 

[The Clamp]

There's a good letter in today's FT which possibly hits the nail on the head - ie, the real motivation for many Leave voters was simply the chance to be heard:

Sir, David P Leader (Letters, August 5) waspishly says that supporters of Brexit may be disillusioned, dissatisfied, disappointed or dispossessed, but are not disenfranchised. He is wrong: a quarter of Brexit voters are supporters of the UK Independence party, and they are disenfranchised. Enfranchisement is not merely the right to mark a ballot paper. It means to possess rights and liberties, to be a citizen who is counted and considered and, in the UK, to be represented in parliament. These meanings are recognised in good dictionaries, and uses of the term date predate popular elections. I don’t like Ukip. I find its policies poorly thought out and prejudiced, and its rhetoric is offensive and repugnant to me. But the fact that almost 4m votes for the party result in only one MP scandalises our political system and threatens to destabilise our society. Many of Ukip’s supporters live in economic and life circumstances that have been deliberately created and exacerbated by economic policies over the past 40 years. In normal circumstances nothing they can do in a polling booth has a chance of changing that: are they not disenfranchised?

On one day in June this community saw a possibility of change, and turned out to vote in numbers that surprised the pundits. I consider the outcome bizarre, and unfortunate, and expect that my children and grandchildren will be paying the price.

And this is also where the Remain campaign failed dismally. If the disenfranchised could have been made wise to the fact that they are better off in the EU. They have more rights in the EU, they have more funding in the EU, they have more chance of employment under the EU. Successive governments and the remain campaign have failed them continually.

 

[beorhthelm]

There's a good letter in today's FT which possibly hits the nail on the head - ie, the real motivation for many Leave voters was simply the chance to be heard:

Sir, David P Leader (Letters, August 5) waspishly says that supporters of Brexit may be disillusioned, dissatisfied, disappointed or dispossessed, but are not disenfranchised. He is wrong: a quarter of Brexit voters are supporters of the UK Independence party, and they are disenfranchised. Enfranchisement is not merely the right to mark a ballot paper. It means to possess rights and liberties, to be a citizen who is counted and considered and, in the UK, to be represented in parliament. These meanings are recognised in good dictionaries, and uses of the term date predate popular elections.

oops, no, a dictionary will say that to enfranchise is to give the right to vote. it is merely the right to mark a ballot paper. and the older meaning was to enfranchise a place, for that place to be represented, and MPs represent a consituency no matter what their political flavour.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Told by Davis for example. He's said that if the EU is daft enough not to give the UK access to the single market without allowing us curbs on immigration then the future will indeed be elsewhere and him and the Fox will trolley off and do deals with markets ten times bigger than the EU, simultaneously putting a tariff on BMWs and the rest which will raise huge amounts of money that he will give to the British car industry.

I don't know about David but Fox has already shown he is very good at raising vast amounts of money. Unfortunately he had to pay much of it back when he emerged as one of the stars of the MPs' expenses scandal.

Indeed David Davis did mention a new free trade area 10 times bigger than The EU - https://corporate.sky.com/media-cen...is,-mp,-secretary-of-state-for-brexit,-170716

Sounds positive. One slight problem though - https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news...-trading-area-10-times-the-size-of-the-earth/

 

[Lincoln Imp]

There's a good letter in today's FT which possibly hits the nail on the head - ie, the real motivation for many Leave voters was simply the chance to be heard:

Sir, David P Leader (Letters, August 5) waspishly says that supporters of Brexit may be disillusioned, dissatisfied, disappointed or dispossessed, but are not disenfranchised. He is wrong: a quarter of Brexit voters are supporters of the UK Independence party, and they are disenfranchised. Enfranchisement is not merely the right to mark a ballot paper. It means to possess rights and liberties, to be a citizen who is counted and considered and, in the UK, to be represented in parliament. These meanings are recognised in good dictionaries, and uses of the term date predate popular elections. I don’t like Ukip. I find its policies poorly thought out and prejudiced, and its rhetoric is offensive and repugnant to me. But the fact that almost 4m votes for the party result in only one MP scandalises our political system and threatens to destabilise our society. Many of Ukip’s supporters live in economic and life circumstances that have been deliberately created and exacerbated by economic policies over the past 40 years. In normal circumstances nothing they can do in a polling booth has a chance of changing that: are they not disenfranchised?

On one day in June this community saw a possibility of change, and turned out to vote in numbers that surprised the pundits. I consider the outcome bizarre, and unfortunate, and expect that my children and grandchildren will be paying the price.

Interesting how UKIP are only now waking up to the fact that first-past-the-post effectively disenfranchises millions of voters, complaining so bitterly that it is used as an excuse for doing what they did on June 23. LibDem voters have had to put up with it for decades.

It would also be interesting to know how many of those of Westminster's finest who led the Leave campaign have ever argued in favour of PR. Listening to the People may have been their slogan during the referendum campaign, but normally they couldn't give a fig, not when it might affect their hold on power

 

[Lincoln Imp]

Indeed David Davis did mention a new free trade area 10 times bigger than The EU - https://corporate.sky.com/media-cen...is,-mp,-secretary-of-state-for-brexit,-170716

Sounds positive. One slight problem though - https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news...-trading-area-10-times-the-size-of-the-earth/

Absolutely, I haven't opened the links yet but I do recall Davis suggesting he could open trade deal with the moon or somewhere. Makes me feel really confident, as did his claim earlier in the year that a post-Brexit UK could and would do trade deals with France, and Germany, and Spain.