Interesting quote I thought. It works for both leavers and remainers doesn't it.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] Brexit
- Thread starter KingstonSeagull
- Start date
Interesting quote I thought. It works for both leavers and remainers doesn't it.
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 27,892
Maybe that's a teeny weeny bit unfair ? Don't remember Labour dealing in sub prime mortgages in the USA ? Or have I been Wooshed ?
Are you legitimising the 'reactions' then? Or would you condemn them?
Explaining them, discussing them.
What would you say by way of discussion about an MP (of either Remain or Leave persuasion) being threatened by violence? How might you explain it and not condemn it?
Ok, so you're being defensive.
Eh? I read a few posts, one was from him, and you were trying to patronise him. It wasn't a compliment. If you've complimented him elsewhere, that's not really relevant.
No, I don't look out for it, I just comment on it when I notice it and feel like it.
KZN saw a tweet from a Labour peer, and then made a fair comment on that tweet. The fact that Corbyn has said he'll meet May doesn't mean KZN can't comment on what Adonis tweeted (regardless of whether KZN had found out what Corbyn said).
What you could have done, was simply replied that although a Labour peer had said it was a trick, that Corbyn wasn't being so cynical (kinda like 'Dick Head' has). Instead you tried to mock him (another Bold Seagull would reply that you're generally a less pathetic poster etc).
pb21
Well-known member
- Apr 23, 2010
- 6,293
Of course they didn't but it doesn't stop the Tories saying that they did and people believing them. Would be a similar lie.
Not exactly a pleasant thought is it? Reading history though suggests that the risk is real.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
Not just threatened with violence. Have you seen Hope not hate's news about Jack Renshaw? A mole went to them, and they prevented Rosie Cooper's murder.
[tweet]1113050873465393152[/tweet]
No condemnation? Just an unpleasant thought? My view is that bad things happen when good people say/do nothing.
dingodan
New member
- Feb 16, 2011
- 10,080
I'm sure you've just made an honest mistake here, but actually Hannan mispoke. If you watch the whole interview he says that the costs of the single market outweigh the benefits, and he talks about the fact that leaving the EU would not exclude us from the free market. He then repeats his point, but uses the word "single" in place of "free" by accident. The video was chopped up by pro remain groups to deliberately mislead by taking advantage of his misspeaking.
From the full interview:
“[businesses say] the costs of EU regulation outweigh the benefits of the Single Market ... I’m going to say this one last time: no-one in Brussels – I’ve been here for 16 years – has ever suggested that if we withdrew from the political aspects of union we would be excluded from the Free Market”
“There are plenty of exporters and entrepreneurs that understand there are better opportunities than under the current deal. But to repeat, absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market” - (he meant "free", not "single").
The difference, for Hannan, between the Free Market and the EU Single Market, is made clear in his book.
“We can say with some certainty that the costs of regulation in the EU outweigh the benefits of the single market” ('Why Vote Leave', Location 1066 in Kindle Edition)
“What is the alternative [to EU membership]? Well, all the options involve remaining part of the European free trade zone that stretches from non-EU Iceland to non-EU Turkey … when every non-EU territory from the Faroe Islands to Montenegro has access to the European free trade area it would be preposterous beyond words to claim that the UK, uniquely, would be denied full market access” (1534)
“It’ll be for the UK’s elected representatives to set the precise terms and conditions of our future relations with the EU. All we can do is set out some broad, obvious guidelines: we’d retain free trade with the single market” (1741) - ["with", not "in"].
Last edited:
Baldseagull
Well-known member
For me, the closest fit for that description is Farage.
I am not one to condemn history nor am I one to defend violence. As you point out though violence may be caused by both 'factions' when they feel 'wronged' I will not say that violence is not effective though, just look at our eu partner France.
I would hope that everyone on here would condemn this vile behaviour utterly and unequivocally rather than wringing their hands and saying it's somehow a historical inevitability......
And for me Nick Boles. I would love to add many more.
So you can't quite bring yourself to condemn violence and threatening behaviour then... you just don't defend it?
What is it actually effective for in your opinion?
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
What he said and what he meant are supposition. You have just agreed he said it.
Arch Remainer Adonis criticised Corbyn’s leadership and policies, being a staunch Blairite. So is Adonis’s view suddenly gospel? Like everyone, he’s just someone with a biased viewpoint. We can keep passing on tweets from biased individuals, it’s gets us nowhere, except makes us feel good that a professional famous person agrees with us.
Instead, let’s hope the party leaders and MP’s in the real world can now reach an agreement on something moderate, rather than the endless round of Twatter and Facebook soundbites ... which got Trump elected.
I look at life in a way that I am happy with not what you may be happy with. I am observing not advocating which is what you so desperately want me to do. Don't you!
Baldseagull
Well-known member
UKIP, Brexit Party or possibly even Conservatives for those wishing to stick two fingers up to Brussels still, Liberals or Greens for Remainers I would think, at least all views should have some representation in the EU system.