Search results

It suggests there wouldn't have been that one. It suggest Europe is more in danger of similar attacks due to the open border policy, than if the countries weren't in the EU.

That is so naive it's ridiculous. If we were discussing something where pretty much everyone in the country was in agreement, you'd have a point, but we're discussing something where the country is completely split. Intelligent, educated, successful people on both sides with different views. If...

I disagree :)

I was preparing to cringe as I watched that, but damn that was funny. Perfect timing.

The editors choose what is and isn't published. mejona wanted facts so he could make an informed decision, and you put forward the LSE as independent. Everything I see on that site seems to support staying in, so I asked you to post a link to one of their articles that supports Brexit. You did...

You're either being disingenuous or naive. "Authors Swati Dhingra and Thomas Sampson note that it is highly uncertain what the UK’s future would look like outside the EU, which makes ‘Brexit’ a leap into the unknown." That's not analysis that is an editorial position. They could have equally...

Oh come on 5ways, you can't be serious? I asked if you could post a link to one of their articles, just one, that supports Brexit, and every word of that article supports staying in the EU.

Maybe you're right, you've read more of their stuff than me. Could you post a link to one of their articles that's in favour if Brexit?

And places to fill with foreign students. And I don't dismiss what they say, I think it's an excellent university. But I'm not sure it's completely unbiased.

Have you been drinking?

The LSE a pro remaining in the EU. How is it independent?

No it isn't. Those who want us to stay in will say the opposite, because it suits their agenda, but not all members of the government want us to stay in.

Same as the rest of us then. It's actually quite similar to an election, because both main parties in an election tell us the economy will do better with them in charge, but there are no FACTS to prove which one is right. IMO your best bet is to watch the speeches from the opposing parties...

Which means a grand total of nothing. No. 10 is campaigning to stay IN, so of course they're going to say that there's no possibility of a second referendum. But it's widely expected that DC will have to resign if we vote OUT, so it won't be up to him anyway.

You've never had a say on leaving the EU either, but people made it known it was an issue, a political party added the option to their manifesto, so we're getting the vote. If the majority of people wanted to get rid of the monarchy, then we'd get politicians preaching it and they'd win votes...

The monarchy :lol: If the public didn't want the monarchy, we'd get rid of it. We're not ruled by the queen. Being able to vote for the laws is obviously more democratic than not being able to, it's ridiculous that you're claiming the opposite.

Scotland would only want to leave the UK if they can join the EU, which might not be possible, and will be an unknown if they get to vote again. And if they join the EU, they'd have to adopt the Euro, which wouldn't be good for Scotland. There's no evidence that Wales would want to leave and go...

We don't need to be in for us to help fight climate change, or to deal with vast corporations.