Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
The Countdown begins. 23:28 - Nov 10 with 226915 viewspikeypaul



https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?iso=20190329T23&p0=1336&msg=Democr

1:19 pm today was the exact mid point from when the result that the Great British public had decided to leave the EU and the time 11pm March 29th 2019 that Democracy will be delivered.

Happy days.
[Post edited 25 Jun 17:01]

🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧
Poll: Next major war involving UK against a super power ?

1
The Countdown begins. on 16:50 - Sep 10 with 521 viewsjohnlangy

The Countdown begins. on 15:52 - Sep 10 by Jango

It wouldn’t really be asking an awful lot for us to get the funding once out if the EU though would it. Wales currently gets roughly £600m a year through EU grants but that’s less than 5% of what the U.K. puts in Net. That’s only 0.1% of U.K. government spending. It would make absolutely no sense for the government to stop this funding and if anything will get better.
[Post edited 10 Sep 15:54]


You seriously think this Tory government will treat Wales fairly post Brexit ?

1
The Countdown begins. on 17:21 - Sep 10 with 487 viewsHighjack

The Countdown begins. on 09:18 - Sep 10 by Batterseajack

Whats the EU ever done for us???

Type your post code in here.

https://www.myeu.uk
[Post edited 10 Sep 9:18]


In my area there’s just a few tiny donations to big tech firms for research on metal.

That website is far from convincing.

The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Poll: What’s your favourite crock?

-1
The Countdown begins. on 21:02 - Sep 10 with 434 viewsCatullus

The Countdown begins. on 09:37 - Sep 10 by sherpajacob

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you!


No you can't explain it because it's not true, there is nothing legally or morally bankrupt in the truth that leave and remain both told lies.
Or are you saying the remain camp said nothing that was untrue because Cameron said bullets would be flying around Europe and Osborne said there'd be an emergency budget, tax rises and massive unemployment, none of which was true, he also predicted events nearly 20 years in the future which is a massive lie, he couldn't predict financial situations 5 years ahead or even 5 months.
Legally and morally bankrupt are just weasel words from someone who won't accept any argument for leaving the EU.
There is nothing morally wrong in stating that both sides told lies but you can try and argue they didn't. If you want moral bankruptcy go back to 1975 when the whole country were persuaded to vote for joining the EEC by lies.

Just my opinion, but WTF do I know anyway?
Blog: In, Out, in, out........

0
The Countdown begins. on 21:07 - Sep 10 with 426 viewslonglostjack

The Countdown begins. on 21:02 - Sep 10 by Catullus

No you can't explain it because it's not true, there is nothing legally or morally bankrupt in the truth that leave and remain both told lies.
Or are you saying the remain camp said nothing that was untrue because Cameron said bullets would be flying around Europe and Osborne said there'd be an emergency budget, tax rises and massive unemployment, none of which was true, he also predicted events nearly 20 years in the future which is a massive lie, he couldn't predict financial situations 5 years ahead or even 5 months.
Legally and morally bankrupt are just weasel words from someone who won't accept any argument for leaving the EU.
There is nothing morally wrong in stating that both sides told lies but you can try and argue they didn't. If you want moral bankruptcy go back to 1975 when the whole country were persuaded to vote for joining the EEC by lies.


What lies were told in 1975?

Poll: Have our US owners improved Swansea City Football Club?

0
The Countdown begins. on 21:12 - Sep 10 with 420 viewsCatullus

The Countdown begins. on 17:21 - Sep 10 by Highjack

In my area there’s just a few tiny donations to big tech firms for research on metal.

That website is far from convincing.


Mine says it helped fund 2 private companies research and then provided 3% of the funding for "DIA Chip" to increase throughput of clinical analysis, less than 17k for medical research but around 140k for private companies. Then there was over 3 million for "wave sub" which is generating electricity from the seas movement, thats for Marine Power Ltd.
So they'll massively fund private enterprise but only give tiny amounts to medical research?
If the WAG had anything about them they'd be arguing vociferously for funding at least at the same level and hopefully more and not trying to argue against leaving when the Welsh electorate voted leave.

Just my opinion, but WTF do I know anyway?
Blog: In, Out, in, out........

-1
The Countdown begins. on 21:23 - Sep 10 with 404 viewsCatullus

The Countdown begins. on 21:07 - Sep 10 by longlostjack

What lies were told in 1975?


The then Prime minister said membership would not affect sovereignty and coverred up a report that said the opposite.
When challanged later as to why he lied he said ‘the British public are too stupid to be involved in governing themselves’.

The following is taken from the government pamphlet of the time, it describes the European Parliament as being powerless and destined to remain powerless

The principal Community laws are made as a result of a complicated process of interaction between the
Council and the Commission, each meeting in secret and relying on a massive network of advisory
committees. The idea behind this elaborate balance of power is that the Community interest, in the form of
the Commission, should carry sufficient weight to prevent the conflicting national interests represented on
the Council from making the Common Market unworkable. The two institutions constitute a powerful nonelected
supranational bureaucracy armed with legislative as well as executive powers, and with law
enforcement powers in addition.
The Parliament, which is at present made up of delegations from the parliaments of the member states, and which meets in Strasbourg, is simply a forum for discussion, except that it has control over about 5 per cent
of the Community budget, and can compel the resignation of the Commission by a two thirds majority vote
(but cannot replace it). The various Commissioners make reports to it, and it delivers ‘opinions’ on
proposals which the Commission is putting forward to the Council. Thus it is merely an advisory body and
has none of the powers that most parliaments possess: the power to make laws, to raise taxes, and to make
and unmake governments. The Treaty of Rome provides that it should in due course become a directly
elected body and the Paris summit set 1978 as the target date for the first elections. Even if it were directly
elected, this would not make the slightest difference; it would remain as powerless as it is at present.

Just my opinion, but WTF do I know anyway?
Blog: In, Out, in, out........

-1
The Countdown begins. on 21:31 - Sep 10 with 399 viewssherpajacob

The Countdown begins. on 21:02 - Sep 10 by Catullus

No you can't explain it because it's not true, there is nothing legally or morally bankrupt in the truth that leave and remain both told lies.
Or are you saying the remain camp said nothing that was untrue because Cameron said bullets would be flying around Europe and Osborne said there'd be an emergency budget, tax rises and massive unemployment, none of which was true, he also predicted events nearly 20 years in the future which is a massive lie, he couldn't predict financial situations 5 years ahead or even 5 months.
Legally and morally bankrupt are just weasel words from someone who won't accept any argument for leaving the EU.
There is nothing morally wrong in stating that both sides told lies but you can try and argue they didn't. If you want moral bankruptcy go back to 1975 when the whole country were persuaded to vote for joining the EEC by lies.


Two opposing people are trying to persuade me to support them.

A) Both tell the truth - my decision is based on the truth.

B) one side lies, one tells the truth. There is a 50% chance my decision is based on the truth.

C) both sides lie. There is a 0% chance my decision is based on the truth.

A is the most valid decision and C is the least valid.

when being sued for libel, or prosecuted for contempt, the defence that other people told lies as well, will not stand up.

Poll: Your favourite ever Swans shirt sponsor?

0
The Countdown begins. on 21:51 - Sep 10 with 384 viewsCatullus

The Countdown begins. on 21:31 - Sep 10 by sherpajacob

Two opposing people are trying to persuade me to support them.

A) Both tell the truth - my decision is based on the truth.

B) one side lies, one tells the truth. There is a 50% chance my decision is based on the truth.

C) both sides lie. There is a 0% chance my decision is based on the truth.

A is the most valid decision and C is the least valid.

when being sued for libel, or prosecuted for contempt, the defence that other people told lies as well, will not stand up.


Yes but that does not make my argument that both sides told lies legally and morally bankrupt, it makes the politicians morally bankrupt.
Even then it doesn't make the result less valid unless everybody who voted was swayed by those lies. Not as long as a good proportion of both sides knew they were being lied to and did their own research, found out for themselves whether they wanted to leave or remain.
You cannot really claim legally bankrupt and no one has been sued for being stupid, listening to and believing lies.
It has long been accepted that politicians don't tell the truth whther it's lying by ommission, claiming not to remember, spinning facts or fkat out lying and hoping not to get caught, they've been at it forever.
Besides which, both sides could tell the truth, as much truth as they wanted you to hear but if they lie by ommission, leave out large chunks of the truth, your opinion is based on what exactly....partial truth...we have seen what partial truths can do. We've seen the posts about our American owners and our financial situation based on partial truth that have been interpreted, misinterpreted, reinterpreted etc.
You try proving that everybody on both sides was convinced (purely by lies) which way to vote and I'll concede the result isn't valid and to start, I personally already wanted to leave years before the referendum was arranged as did many people, how many people were in UKIP beofre the EUref?

Just my opinion, but WTF do I know anyway?
Blog: In, Out, in, out........

0
Login to get fewer ads

The Countdown begins. on 21:52 - Sep 10 with 383 viewsJango

The Countdown begins. on 21:31 - Sep 10 by sherpajacob

Two opposing people are trying to persuade me to support them.

A) Both tell the truth - my decision is based on the truth.

B) one side lies, one tells the truth. There is a 50% chance my decision is based on the truth.

C) both sides lie. There is a 0% chance my decision is based on the truth.

A is the most valid decision and C is the least valid.

when being sued for libel, or prosecuted for contempt, the defence that other people told lies as well, will not stand up.


You’re assuming people voted based on those lies. I certainly didn’t. In fact the remain argument is that nobody that voted leave knew what they were voting for yet remain voters did. Just let it go.
-1
The Countdown begins. on 22:02 - Sep 10 with 373 viewssherpajacob

The Countdown begins. on 21:51 - Sep 10 by Catullus

Yes but that does not make my argument that both sides told lies legally and morally bankrupt, it makes the politicians morally bankrupt.
Even then it doesn't make the result less valid unless everybody who voted was swayed by those lies. Not as long as a good proportion of both sides knew they were being lied to and did their own research, found out for themselves whether they wanted to leave or remain.
You cannot really claim legally bankrupt and no one has been sued for being stupid, listening to and believing lies.
It has long been accepted that politicians don't tell the truth whther it's lying by ommission, claiming not to remember, spinning facts or fkat out lying and hoping not to get caught, they've been at it forever.
Besides which, both sides could tell the truth, as much truth as they wanted you to hear but if they lie by ommission, leave out large chunks of the truth, your opinion is based on what exactly....partial truth...we have seen what partial truths can do. We've seen the posts about our American owners and our financial situation based on partial truth that have been interpreted, misinterpreted, reinterpreted etc.
You try proving that everybody on both sides was convinced (purely by lies) which way to vote and I'll concede the result isn't valid and to start, I personally already wanted to leave years before the referendum was arranged as did many people, how many people were in UKIP beofre the EUref?


If one person was influenced by lies then the result becomes less valid.

We don't know how many people were or weren't influenced, but we do know there were lies, and it was a close result.

Your statement "unless everybody who voted was swayed" is frankly ludicrous.

Poll: Your favourite ever Swans shirt sponsor?

1
The Countdown begins. on 22:05 - Sep 10 with 364 viewslonglostjack

The Countdown begins. on 21:23 - Sep 10 by Catullus

The then Prime minister said membership would not affect sovereignty and coverred up a report that said the opposite.
When challanged later as to why he lied he said ‘the British public are too stupid to be involved in governing themselves’.

The following is taken from the government pamphlet of the time, it describes the European Parliament as being powerless and destined to remain powerless

The principal Community laws are made as a result of a complicated process of interaction between the
Council and the Commission, each meeting in secret and relying on a massive network of advisory
committees. The idea behind this elaborate balance of power is that the Community interest, in the form of
the Commission, should carry sufficient weight to prevent the conflicting national interests represented on
the Council from making the Common Market unworkable. The two institutions constitute a powerful nonelected
supranational bureaucracy armed with legislative as well as executive powers, and with law
enforcement powers in addition.
The Parliament, which is at present made up of delegations from the parliaments of the member states, and which meets in Strasbourg, is simply a forum for discussion, except that it has control over about 5 per cent
of the Community budget, and can compel the resignation of the Commission by a two thirds majority vote
(but cannot replace it). The various Commissioners make reports to it, and it delivers ‘opinions’ on
proposals which the Commission is putting forward to the Council. Thus it is merely an advisory body and
has none of the powers that most parliaments possess: the power to make laws, to raise taxes, and to make
and unmake governments. The Treaty of Rome provides that it should in due course become a directly
elected body and the Paris summit set 1978 as the target date for the first elections. Even if it were directly
elected, this would not make the slightest difference; it would remain as powerless as it is at present.


I can’t see anything wrong with the analysis in that pamphlet. The European Parliament is a fairly toothless organization with limited powers even today. As for cover-ups, I’ve no doubt that the amount of toilet paper used in Whitehall was subject to the 30 year rule in those days.
[Post edited 10 Sep 22:06]

Poll: Have our US owners improved Swansea City Football Club?

0
The Countdown begins. on 22:17 - Sep 10 with 342 viewsJango

The Countdown begins. on 22:02 - Sep 10 by sherpajacob

If one person was influenced by lies then the result becomes less valid.

We don't know how many people were or weren't influenced, but we do know there were lies, and it was a close result.

Your statement "unless everybody who voted was swayed" is frankly ludicrous.


There’s lied told in every general election. We’d be going around in circles constantly.
-1
The Countdown begins. on 22:18 - Sep 10 with 342 viewsCatullus

The Countdown begins. on 22:02 - Sep 10 by sherpajacob

If one person was influenced by lies then the result becomes less valid.

We don't know how many people were or weren't influenced, but we do know there were lies, and it was a close result.

Your statement "unless everybody who voted was swayed" is frankly ludicrous.


Just what has it being a close result got to do with it? Maybe if both sides had told the real truth leave or remain would have won by a landslide but there was no stipulation that there had to be any kind of winning margin, the result could have been decidedly closer but it would have stood, otherwise we'd be having another referendum on devolution and several general elections would be re-run.
Remainers bang on about it being close when they know it's a pointless and irrelevant argument.
If any democratic vote by the electorate had a stipulation of a large winning margin we'd hardly ever have any winners. In a yes/no or in/out vote 50.01 wins.

Just my opinion, but WTF do I know anyway?
Blog: In, Out, in, out........

-1
The Countdown begins. on 22:19 - Sep 10 with 338 viewssherpajacob

The Countdown begins. on 22:18 - Sep 10 by Catullus

Just what has it being a close result got to do with it? Maybe if both sides had told the real truth leave or remain would have won by a landslide but there was no stipulation that there had to be any kind of winning margin, the result could have been decidedly closer but it would have stood, otherwise we'd be having another referendum on devolution and several general elections would be re-run.
Remainers bang on about it being close when they know it's a pointless and irrelevant argument.
If any democratic vote by the electorate had a stipulation of a large winning margin we'd hardly ever have any winners. In a yes/no or in/out vote 50.01 wins.


Like I said.

I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.

Poll: Your favourite ever Swans shirt sponsor?

0
The Countdown begins. on 22:21 - Sep 10 with 332 viewssherpajacob

The Countdown begins. on 22:17 - Sep 10 by Jango

There’s lied told in every general election. We’d be going around in circles constantly.


Every 4 to 5 years approximately.

Poll: Your favourite ever Swans shirt sponsor?

0
The Countdown begins. on 22:26 - Sep 10 with 324 viewsJango

The Countdown begins. on 22:21 - Sep 10 by sherpajacob

Every 4 to 5 years approximately.


Would you be making the same song and dance about these lies if the vote had gone the way you wanted? Nope.
-1
The Countdown begins. on 23:52 - Sep 10 with 282 viewsDJack

The Countdown begins. on 17:21 - Sep 10 by Highjack

In my area there’s just a few tiny donations to big tech firms for research on metal.

That website is far from convincing.


So money to support (well paid) tech jobs is unconvincing?

It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan

1

The Countdown begins. on 04:18 - Sep 11 with 238 viewspikeypaul

199 AFLI

SIUYRL

🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧
Poll: Next major war involving UK against a super power ?

-1
The Countdown begins. on 06:18 - Sep 11 with 226 viewsKilkennyjack

The Countdown begins. on 16:50 - Sep 10 by johnlangy

You seriously think this Tory government will treat Wales fairly post Brexit ?



Spot on john.

The English Tories hate labour voting wales.

Yesterday this happened ....

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-wales-politics-45452032

Next we will have an Englishman calling himself the Prince of Wales. How mad is that ?

‘Beware of the risen people’ ........🍀🇮🇪 💚 YesCymru 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿

0
The Countdown begins. on 06:27 - Sep 11 with 219 viewspeenemunde

The Countdown begins. on 22:02 - Sep 10 by sherpajacob

If one person was influenced by lies then the result becomes less valid.

We don't know how many people were or weren't influenced, but we do know there were lies, and it was a close result.

Your statement "unless everybody who voted was swayed" is frankly ludicrous.


I’ve read some nonsense on here and that post ⬆️ is right up there 🤣
It’s desperation time for the remoaners now.
[Post edited 11 Sep 6:29]
-1
The Countdown begins. on 07:07 - Sep 11 with 196 viewsGowerjack

The Countdown begins. on 21:23 - Sep 10 by Catullus

The then Prime minister said membership would not affect sovereignty and coverred up a report that said the opposite.
When challanged later as to why he lied he said ‘the British public are too stupid to be involved in governing themselves’.

The following is taken from the government pamphlet of the time, it describes the European Parliament as being powerless and destined to remain powerless

The principal Community laws are made as a result of a complicated process of interaction between the
Council and the Commission, each meeting in secret and relying on a massive network of advisory
committees. The idea behind this elaborate balance of power is that the Community interest, in the form of
the Commission, should carry sufficient weight to prevent the conflicting national interests represented on
the Council from making the Common Market unworkable. The two institutions constitute a powerful nonelected
supranational bureaucracy armed with legislative as well as executive powers, and with law
enforcement powers in addition.
The Parliament, which is at present made up of delegations from the parliaments of the member states, and which meets in Strasbourg, is simply a forum for discussion, except that it has control over about 5 per cent
of the Community budget, and can compel the resignation of the Commission by a two thirds majority vote
(but cannot replace it). The various Commissioners make reports to it, and it delivers ‘opinions’ on
proposals which the Commission is putting forward to the Council. Thus it is merely an advisory body and
has none of the powers that most parliaments possess: the power to make laws, to raise taxes, and to make
and unmake governments. The Treaty of Rome provides that it should in due course become a directly
elected body and the Paris summit set 1978 as the target date for the first elections. Even if it were directly
elected, this would not make the slightest difference; it would remain as powerless as it is at present.


Your point relating to sovereignty is arrant nonsense.

This quote is from the Government's White Paper regarding Brexit..

" Parliamentary sovereignty
2.1 The sovereignty of Parliament is a fundamental principle of the UK constitution. Whilst Parliament has remained sovereign throughout our membership of the EU "

Still you carry on in your little Daily Express bubble chanting the mantra project fear whilst blithely ignoring the facts.

Plastic since 1974
Poll: Is the Ressurection

2
The Countdown begins. on 07:10 - Sep 11 with 193 viewspeenemunde

The Countdown begins. on 07:07 - Sep 11 by Gowerjack

Your point relating to sovereignty is arrant nonsense.

This quote is from the Government's White Paper regarding Brexit..

" Parliamentary sovereignty
2.1 The sovereignty of Parliament is a fundamental principle of the UK constitution. Whilst Parliament has remained sovereign throughout our membership of the EU "

Still you carry on in your little Daily Express bubble chanting the mantra project fear whilst blithely ignoring the facts.


Absolute nonsense. Eu laws in many areas cannot be changed by the UK parliament and that’s a fact.
-1
The Countdown begins. on 07:13 - Sep 11 with 187 viewsGowerjack

The Countdown begins. on 07:10 - Sep 11 by peenemunde

Absolute nonsense. Eu laws in many areas cannot be changed by the UK parliament and that’s a fact.


Hey Fûckwit

I suggest you look up the meaning of the word sovereignty.

Plastic since 1974
Poll: Is the Ressurection

1
The Countdown begins. on 07:16 - Sep 11 with 183 viewspeenemunde

The Countdown begins. on 07:13 - Sep 11 by Gowerjack

Hey Fûckwit

I suggest you look up the meaning of the word sovereignty.


Hey simpleton, you are just to thick to understand.
-2
The Countdown begins. on 07:58 - Sep 11 with 169 viewsKilkennyjack

The Countdown begins. on 07:16 - Sep 11 by peenemunde

Hey simpleton, you are just to thick to understand.


Peewee/penis,

May school was not your strong point...?

Its ‘too thick to understand’, not ‘to thick to understand’.

Which makes you a fecking divo !! Twaaat.

‘Beware of the risen people’ ........🍀🇮🇪 💚 YesCymru 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿

3
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© FansNetwork 2018