Brexit omelette with ham and cheese.

[rock hound]

From Pea....my last message for awhile!

"Scraaaaaaap!

Semper Fi, you cunt.

Now this is a badass who actually killed people during his time as a soldier.

Did the UK do the right thing? What do you think about Scotland and the UK oligarchy trying to block our vote?"

[MLA]

From Pea....my last message for awhile!

"Scraaaaaaap!

Semper Fi, you cunt.

Now this is a badass who actually killed people during his time as a soldier.

Did the UK do the right thing? What do you think about Scotland and the UK oligarchy trying to block our vote?"

I don't know who is more pathetic.  The loser who managed to get himself banned from the most permissive internet forum around, or the guy who carries his water so he can keep interacting.  One is clearly very sad about being booted, and the other seems to be lacking friends despite the fact that he is allowed in the group.

[Yuri Bezmenov]

[benjimanbreeg]

Fucking awful

Genuinely feel devastated

Stayed up all night watching the results come through with a growing sense of horror.

Got about an hours sleep, and now I just want to cry

Yeah, my colleagues in London spent most of the time cursing when I talked to them this morning. It's a disaster.

I don't think most of the people who voted know how bad this is.

That's because London is in a bubble and has no idea what happens in the real world.  The backbone of the country has spoken!  Democracy has one, the corporate machine has taken a smashing but will punish the working class for making the wrong choice.

Actually I think it's rather the other way around. The real world is not just some shithole in Wales these days, like it or not. Isolationism doesn't work.

See look at you, you arrogant cunt.  Your retarded heroes like Damon Albarn and his flock are isolationists, and they do not tolerate and accept democratic results that go against them.  You're allowed to have an opinion, as long as it's the right one.  London is a mess, it is being socially cleansed and the victims of that have bitten back.

As I mentioned above, it seems pretty easy to see millions voted a specific way, to say they all are bigots and/or stupid seems ironically either bigoted and/or stupid.
There were pros and cons. People chose what they were prepared to accept and voted accordingly.  That more people placed importance on leaving than Odeon and Butterflies did is neither here nor there. It was their choice to make and they made it.
This whole Wales shithole comment sounds a little bit pissy.

The sad truth is that this is an issue that should never had been voted on because it's beyond the morons in the shitholes in Wales. Fear-mongering won, not facts, best witnessed by the Leave campaign's leaders nowhere close to offering a single practical way to solve the mess they were instrumental in creating. Seriously. When did they provide a single workable plan? They've already backed on most of the promises the made, and for good reason. Invoking Article 50 will be the undoing of the union, and the union's economy.

So yes, of course it's a pissy comment, but it's a comparatively mild reaction. There are far worse.

God, you really are a complete imbecile and Joseph Stalin's wet dream.  'Please save us the ones that have destroyed the country, we're too stupid to make decisions for ourselves'     Try reading some George Orwell novels. 

Oh yeah, because your hero Cameron and co didn't try to use fear, claiming there would be WWIII if we left or we would be voting in ISIS's interests, and the way the media used Jo Cox's death.

Idiot. Cameron was never my hero but he, unlike Boris et al, does have a point. WWIII is news to me, though. Care to elaborate?

But here's the thing: I know I'm right and will be here in a year or two when you will recall the good old days when you had money. And I will remind you.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/brexit-could-trigger-world-war-7928607

You don't know anything.  Like I've said before, you are more interested in being right than the truth.  You are so insecure it's embarrassing.

I watched through the clip. Did you? The headlines say "could trigger WWIII" but Cameron didn't.

I got that wrong, he didn't actually say those words, but I'm sure you'll be honest and admit that's the exact point he's trying to make.  Sick of him to do such a thing.

Just as you got it wrong with NHS and the £350 million. Get used to being wrong a lot.

And no, he did not imply WW3. If you're honest, you'll admit it. He was rather referring to one of the main reasons to why the EU came to be in the first place, which is still a valid reason.

And today it got even more obvious that the Leave campaigners lack any kind of plan. Boris doesn't even believe in the shit he advocated, and he pretty much admitted it by stepping down. I guess it came as a huge shock to him and his former pal Gove that Cameron had not intention to invoke Article 50 or help negotiate anything. Now, none of them is keen on invoking Article 50 because they know it equals political suicide. Somebody is going to be blamed when it all goes to shit.

Did you know that it's most likely illegal for them to do it anyway? Only legislation can repeal legislation, so the Parliament--and the Queen--will both have to approve the new legislation giving the PM the power to invoke Article 50.

At which point the House of Lords could easily block the legislation for another year.

In the meanwhile, nothing gets negotiated because the EU has clearly said that no negotiations will take place before the UK state their intentions. Even then, the negotiations are likely to be about the exit, not about a new deal. This was pointed out by the EU Trade Commissioner today.

Of course, while all this is happening (that is, very little is happening beyond the pound dropping and your economy going to shit), you are still a member of the EU but one shunned by the other members.

But eventually, if by some miracle the new legislation is passed and a future PM is brave enough for a political suicide, Article 50 is invoked and a minimum of two years is spent negotiating the terms of that exit, eventually there could be negotiations for a new deal. Now, those will take years and years--Canada, anyone?--and if the UK wants the Single Market, a minimum, non-negotiable, condition of that is free movement, but also a number of other conditions that nobody mentioned before the referendum. All of which the UK (or what's left of it) will accept because by then, the business is far more important than Nigel and his cronies, and the backwater Wales farmers who voted for them, because the recession has arrived, jobs are scarce and a lot of institutions, cities and forgotten-about villages, not to mention the NHS, all remember fondly the EU structural contributions that, once upon a time, helped them prosper.

I hope I'm wrong but I don't think I am.

I thought you were talking about Farage anyway.  Like I said, I didn't pay too much attention to Boris and Gove or any of the debates, I've seen it all before and focused more on radio shows where "experts" from both sides were coming on and just saying the complete opposite from each other.  The intention was to confuse people. 

"Can we be so sure peace and stability on our continent are assured beyond any shadow of doubt? Is that a risk worth taking?

"I would never be so rash to make that assumption."

Sound like he was talking in any kind of past tense there ^ does it?  Once again you prove you cannot deal with or admit when you are wrong.  Grow up. 

Boris would not employ Gove's friends like George Osborne, so Gove turned on Boris as he probably felt he'd betrayed his chums enough.  We need to have an immediate General Election.  The trouble is, your heroes were so arrogant and thought the public was too stupid and easily fooled to vote to leave the EU, so they made no plans in case of a leave vote.  The Leave campaigners were not selected by the public, and to be honest it should have been Daniel Hannan or Nigel Farage at the helm, people who were actually prepared to leave and prepared for leaving and actually believe what they say.  It should actually be up to David Cameron to enforce the democratic wishes of the people, but instead, your hero cowardly resigned immediately.  I actually agree with the EU on this, we need to leave first then strike a deal.  We should strike a deal like Israel has, trade with the EU and just have an immigration system that brings back Brits from abroad and removes non Brits perhaps?  We definitely need a General Election soon, choose a government with them knowing they have to take us out and strike a deal and let the public choose. 

Yes, I wouldn't be surprised if we just stayed in the EU, but then they know that could lead to riots or civil war.  Peter Hitchens who is against the EU, is also against referendums, for the reasons you stated. 

Like I said, we can have a deal like Israel, and people should be asking that question why they get away with it.  You pray you are right, but I have faith in the country to fight for justice.  It's time we take on the big corporations and make them pay real tax.  We can also renationalise our Post Office and Rail Service if we get away from the EU and those sick trade treaties that we done against what is best for the people of the country.

I agree with you on a General Election, actually. A lot of what's happening now is not what the voters did vote on last year, so an election makes sense.

As for the rest of your post, not much of it makes sense. It's very clear to me that you only see what you want to see, and most of it has nothing to do with any recent events, the referendum included. Discussing the recent events with you, then, is a futile exercise.

The Tories need to get a leader first. 

You mean it was news to you and the media haven't mentioned it?  I would have been called a "conspiracy theorist" when I said the desperation to get rid of Corbyn was because of the Chilcot Report and now that has been proven correct, among other reasons.  If the corporate media doesn't tell you, then you don't know about it or you don't accept it.  No wonder you crow what the corporate machine wants. 

[benjimanbreeg]

You voted for Brexit, surely you'd know about this?

Do you not read what I write?  I said I do not give a shit about Boris and Co, I was into this way before the whole 'Brexit' thing.  I have already told you why I voted out.  Boris is a cunt, Gove is a cunt.  I was astonished that we voted to 'leave' with those 2 parasites at the helm.

So you admit that you never bothered to find out the facts? Fucking hell. You deserve what you get. Like it or not, Boris, Gove et al are the kind of people you effectively voted for.

I knew the facts I needed to know long before you moved here.  I did not vote for Boris or Gove you moron, I voted to leave the European Union.  No one knew Cameron was going to resign.  You have very good hindsight though 

I wrote "effectively". But then, you not understanding the difference is really why people like you shouldn't be allowed to vote in the first place. You simply aren't capable of deciding anything more important than ...

Sorry, I tried to think of something there to be nice, but couldn't. You shouldn't be allowed to decide anything, tbh.

Still wrong, even though you try to squirm out.  I based my decision on people like Enoch Powell, Tony Benn and Michael Foot, as well as the older generation that were tricked into the EU in the first place.  I wonder if you'd be saying we shouldn't be allowed to vote if we'd voted to stay in.... 

You're that backward, arrogant and brainwashed that you cannot even respect other people's views and reasons for wanting to leave the EU.  You're that much of a little bitch that you pray that those with the most power should rule us and tell us what's best for us because we're all too stupid to understand or make a choice.  Why don't you just fuck off back to Sweden? 

[benjimanbreeg]

As for Brexit and its effects on the UK:

This is, quite obviously, just the beginning and everything is in turmoil. Me, I really hope that I am going to be wrong because I like the country and, these days, very much depend on it. As many other expats, I can't help but notice the short-term effects because they are very real and affect me directly.

I think the warnings about the long-term effects are correct and that they haven't been taken seriously by many of the voters (and non-voters, actually). I think the legal experts who point out that Brexit actually must be a Parliamentary decision are correct, and I'm surprised this was not explored further long before the referendum. Cameron certainly should have.

And I think that this is something that should never have been voted on because it's actually something that is beyond most people (present company included). It is a bit like hiring people on the street as surgeons, it's not a good idea, because not everything is something that can be properly understood by the general population.

You want to live in a dictatorship, then please do this country a favor and fuck off.  We vote in elections and choose the government.  We made a decision and it is down to the government to implement that decision.  But your heroes were too arrogant and moronic to have a plan for something they thought wasn't possible.  So in fact, it is actually your beloved 'experts' that have proved to be utterly incompetent, a bit like they were when it comes to decision making regarding things like you know, wars.  And in the case of Iraq, your beloved 'experts' were proved to be utterly incompetent, where as the British people and the "conspiracy theorists" have been proved right   

[Al Swearegen]

Sweden is considered by media to be the rape capital of the world. Whilst I think that is possibly a little unfair. I sure as Hell I think it would not be a place to "move back to" or visit. 

Swedish politics and Swedish culture has contributed to its internationally headlined "Swedish rape epidemic".

I think on this basis alone, any political ideology or political decisions they have are likely the "wrong ones" to have. If they collectively want to stay in EU for example, doing the opposite will likely take you further away from them politically and culturally.  That may in itself be a good thing.

[benjimanbreeg]

I wrote "effectively". But then, you not understanding the difference is really why people like you shouldn't be allowed to vote in the first place. You simply aren't capable of deciding anything more important than ...

Sorry, I tried to think of something there to be nice, but couldn't. You shouldn't be allowed to decide anything, tbh.

Yeah this is a load of crap. I know you don't suffer fools, but I didn't know you went as far as thinking they should not be allowed to vote in a democracy. Every citizen should be equal under the law, because every citizen will have to live with the consequences of the vote. A country is not private property for an educated elite to be fucking around with.

While the above is specifically against Benji, I think allowing people (including me, btw) to vote on something like this is a very bad idea. There is no way most know, or are able to learn, enough to make a competent decision.

Democracy is not just about being allowed to vote, it's also about responsibility and accountability. We can, and perhaps should, elect our leaders, the idea being that they are competent enough to handle this sort of thing and if not, we'll pick someone else the next time. The idea is that THEY are competent enough to handle the big decisions that we simply cannot, or that they in turn can nominate experts who can.

A referendum to decide on those matters, however, is never about responsibility since the people are easily swayed and susceptible to all kinds of horror stories and irrationality, and once they've voted they'll just go back to whatever they were doing, without any accountability or responsibility whatsoever. It's everyone's fault and it's no-one's fault. The question itself is a simple yes/no and so there doesn't have to be a thorough analysis of anything, just an instinct or a feeling, a quick vote, and that's it.

The idea that a referendum is the ultimate form of democracy and thus must make sense is an illusion. You might as well allow the general population to vote on treatment options for the sick in a hospital.

Witness the "morning after" the Brexit vote, when many leave voters rather uncharacteristically realised that they had been lied to and admitted it, thousands of them going out in the streets to protest. It's unheard of right after an election, which is as it should be because the idea of democracy should actually not be to vote on government decisions but to vote on a government to do it in their place.

So if you want to be upset with me for not wanting the general population to vote on this sort of thing, go right ahead. Benji has illustrated rather well why the idea is so bizarre in the first place.

 

I like it when you make big political posts, you always prove that you know fuck all.   

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/may/09/anti-austerity-protesters-take-to-uk-streets-after-tory-election-victory

[benjimanbreeg]

I wrote "effectively". But then, you not understanding the difference is really why people like you shouldn't be allowed to vote in the first place. You simply aren't capable of deciding anything more important than ...

Sorry, I tried to think of something there to be nice, but couldn't. You shouldn't be allowed to decide anything, tbh.

Yeah this is a load of crap. I know you don't suffer fools, but I didn't know you went as far as thinking they should not be allowed to vote in a democracy. Every citizen should be equal under the law, because every citizen will have to live with the consequences of the vote. A country is not private property for an educated elite to be fucking around with.

While the above is specifically against Benji, I think allowing people (including me, btw) to vote on something like this is a very bad idea. There is no way most know, or are able to learn, enough to make a competent decision.

Democracy is not just about being allowed to vote, it's also about responsibility and accountability. We can, and perhaps should, elect our leaders, the idea being that they are competent enough to handle this sort of thing and if not, we'll pick someone else the next time. The idea is that THEY are competent enough to handle the big decisions that we simply cannot, or that they in turn can nominate experts who can.

A referendum to decide on those matters, however, is never about responsibility since the people are easily swayed and susceptible to all kinds of horror stories and irrationality, and once they've voted they'll just go back to whatever they were doing, without any accountability or responsibility whatsoever. It's everyone's fault and it's no-one's fault. The question itself is a simple yes/no and so there doesn't have to be a thorough analysis of anything, just an instinct or a feeling, a quick vote, and that's it.

The idea that a referendum is the ultimate form of democracy and thus must make sense is an illusion. You might as well allow the general population to vote on treatment options for the sick in a hospital.

Witness the "morning after" the Brexit vote, when many leave voters rather uncharacteristically realised that they had been lied to and admitted it, thousands of them going out in the streets to protest. It's unheard of right after an election, which is as it should be because the idea of democracy should actually not be to vote on government decisions but to vote on a government to do it in their place.

So if you want to be upset with me for not wanting the general population to vote on this sort of thing, go right ahead. Benji has illustrated rather well why the idea is so bizarre in the first place.

Summarised if I may:

I have a different opinion to Benji and dislike him personally.

Therefore Benji is wrong, wrong, wrong

Therefore his opinion is dangerous and uninformed and ill-thought out and he must not be able to represent any of his views by way of voting.

Better the Government make our decisions for us than risk someone like Benji or many people like Benji (that I disagree with) make decisions for us. Welcome to Big Brother

He ought to read some Orwell, definitely. 

[Pyraxis]

Sweden is considered by media to be the rape capital of the world. Whilst I think that is possibly a little unfair. I sure as Hell I think it would not be a place to "move back to" or visit. 

Swedish politics and Swedish culture has contributed to its internationally headlined "Swedish rape epidemic".

I think on this basis alone, any political ideology or political decisions they have are likely the "wrong ones" to have. If they collectively want to stay in EU for example, doing the opposite will likely take you further away from them politically and culturally.  That may in itself be a good thing.

Really? What does rape have to do with strategic political decisions?

[benjimanbreeg]

"Get on with things" implies the Leave campaign had a plan. They didn't, or they are hiding it exceptionally well because all they have done after the referendum is to go back on their promises. But if you know better, then I think you should speak up, Al.

And arguing that since there was a time when they weren't a member of the EU and everything worked just fine is a bit like saying that we've done without electricity before and we can again.

It was up to the elected government to have a plan, as the fucking referendum was in their manifesto last year.  The Tories didn't actually expect to get a majority and carry out their promise.  They had gotten away with their "cast iron" promise of a referendum in 2010 by being saved by the Lib Dems and would have hoped for something similar last year.  It was down to the Prime Minister to plan for either outcome on the referendum, but he only planned for one and then cried and resigned on the spot when it didn't go his way. 

[Al Swearegen]

Sweden is considered by media to be the rape capital of the world. Whilst I think that is possibly a little unfair. I sure as Hell I think it would not be a place to "move back to" or visit. 

Swedish politics and Swedish culture has contributed to its internationally headlined "Swedish rape epidemic".

I think on this basis alone, any political ideology or political decisions they have are likely the "wrong ones" to have. If they collectively want to stay in EU for example, doing the opposite will likely take you further away from them politically and culturally.  That may in itself be a good thing.

Really? What does rape have to do with strategic political decisions?

I think it is a combination of things. But a large part of things is the political. Why I say this is that if a nation, culture is open, liberal and accepting, then all of these things sound on the face of it very positive and ideals to aspire to. However it does not take much to see the drawbacks of treating a society as though everyone thought this way.

It precisely the reason that as patents we teach our kids good values but also how to fight back against those that do what they are not allowed to do.

We also teach our children that they are best excluding people that aren't nice. We teach our kids that we will protect them and that if we are not there that they are not to place themselves in harms way.

A nation that is falling over themselves to be accepting and inclusive beyond the ability to protect themselves, is certainly contributing to rape epidemic.

It gets better. You can bet that the measures, if any, they take to address this (apparently "Don't grope" brackets given out at a music concert did not work as they were worn but the perpetrators)  will be...... Males to accompany single women and/or women to dress more moderately (perhaps introducing recommended Burke's or the like).

[benjimanbreeg]

Sweden is considered by media to be the rape capital of the world. Whilst I think that is possibly a little unfair. I sure as Hell I think it would not be a place to "move back to" or visit. 

Swedish politics and Swedish culture has contributed to its internationally headlined "Swedish rape epidemic".

I think on this basis alone, any political ideology or political decisions they have are likely the "wrong ones" to have. If they collectively want to stay in EU for example, doing the opposite will likely take you further away from them politically and culturally.  That may in itself be a good thing.

Really? What does rape have to do with strategic political decisions?

Deciding to flood the country with people from subcultures.  But as Mrs Spectre said, "Europe must learn to become multicultural" otherwise "it will not survive". 

[Al Swearegen]

Sweden is considered by media to be the rape capital of the world. Whilst I think that is possibly a little unfair. I sure as Hell I think it would not be a place to "move back to" or visit. 

Swedish politics and Swedish culture has contributed to its internationally headlined "Swedish rape epidemic".

I think on this basis alone, any political ideology or political decisions they have are likely the "wrong ones" to have. If they collectively want to stay in EU for example, doing the opposite will likely take you further away from them politically and culturally.  That may in itself be a good thing.

Really? What does rape have to do with strategic political decisions?

Deciding to flood the country with people from subcultures.  But as Mrs Spectre said, "Europe must learn to become multicultural" otherwise "it will not survive".

I think that Britain IS multicultural.
How many in Britain is 100% genetically https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_Britons . I am thinking it is approximately 0%, give or take. Even among the "white" British, many have Saxon blood, Frankish blood, Scandinavian blood, Celtic blood, Pictish blood, Roman blood.
The type of person to make that kind of a statement is pandering to a moot point.
Britain and no doubt Europe IS multicultural. Has been for a long long time. In order for her statement to make sense, you need to assume that there is a question as to whether or not Europe isn't in the first place. Next you need to consider the method as to make it multicultural and in which way not being so would be a good or a bad thing.
If for example Japan said "You know what, fuck Australians. We don't like them and they are not welcome here." I think that is absolutely their right and I would not fight them on my right to visit a place that does not want me. However IF they said we have had some big issues with Australians being arseholes here, we need to place a hold on Aussies visiting here until we explore the reasons why they specifically have been arseholes and how we could manage them better and stop them being arseholes, I would think that fair enough.

Now I use this example specifically for two reasons. If I had of said a country in the middle east, Odeon would go full on conspiracy nut BUT also because teh Japanese HAVE in some places banned the sale of Bundaberg Rum. Why? Because Aussies would go over there get on the Rum get drunk, aggro and turn into arseholes. Bundy Rum has that reputation in Australia and I am glad it is not foisted overseas.

It is practical and reasonable for a country to do what they think is best for them.

[benjimanbreeg]

Those groups are what have made the British people, and the key also being that they are closer in a lot of ways.  We had formed a monotone culture pretty much.  White British people have become a minority in their own capital city in a matter of decades.  That's insane.  These policies have been carried out with evil intent and we're seeing the results more and more frequently now.