Brexit celebrations rub Remainers' noses in it, says

[Streetwalker]

:Patriot:  :Patriot:  :Patriot:

The club are putting on the sarnies !    Free beer for  the over 80's as long as you bring both parents  and have promised they wont shut until there is nobody to serve . (Just a normal Friday then  )  

[Baron von Lotsov]

You know when we won WW2 there was a mega celebration in our town, and one of the soldiers returning from the war was so happy that he climbed all the way up tot the top of our church tower and put a union jack up. Health and Safety would have had kittens to see that today, but I guess that's what the women call real men. Our churches here are in the architectural style of the "Somerset Perpendicular" and that's what it was and still is!



Looking about in today's world, I can pretty much bet the town will be deserted except for one or two walking their dogs.

[johnofgwent]

Not sure where you get this info from john , but wales voted 52.5% to leave the eu , while england voted 53.38% to leave , which shows england was more pro leave than wales.



I think you obviously mean wales was marginally more pro leave then the uk wide result , by a mere 0.61 %.



Thats 0.6% difference is funnily enough the difference between the no and aye for the 1997 welsh devolution referendum which you constantly argue against.



So if wales was more pro leave than the uk by your own argument , then it was more pro welsh assembly too by your own argument . :hattip :thup:

Ooh that's interesting, I wonder what it was I read back in 2016 that suggested it was far more.



Ok fair enough I got it wrong. But we still have a whole load of remainer bastards in that senedd we need to drown



And as for that bloody welsh devolution referendum, it was swung by a last minute wheelbarrowful of postal votes from cottage burner reservoir bomber HQ

[Thomas]

In Wales of course the people voted even more in favour to leave than in England, yet the shitheads in cardiff still seek to thwart the people ...



Their execution will come

Not sure where you get this info from john , but wales voted 52.5% to leave the eu , while england voted 53.38% to leave , which shows england was more pro leave than wales.



I think you obviously mean wales was marginally more pro leave then the uk wide result , by a mere 0.61 %.



Thats 0.6% difference is funnily enough the difference between the no and aye for the 1997 welsh devolution referendum which you constantly argue against.



So if wales was more pro leave than the uk by your own argument , then it was more pro welsh assembly too by your own argument . :hattip :thup:

[johnofgwent]

Well this is it — Johnson claims that there will be no alignment between GB and the EU but also no checks between NI and GB.  Those statements can't both be true at the same time ....and therefore he is either lying or lacks the commonest of common sense.



But we all know what Johnson is about by now.  He's not interested in saying anything on Brexit which is diplomatically credible in the eyes of the UK's supposed cherished neighbours — he is a guy who plays to the gallery and everything is aimed for his spin machine.  So of course he says there will be no alignment, because everyone will cheer Hardball Johnson. And of course he'll say there will be no checks between GB and NI, because Hardball Johnson called Softball May's deal a surrender agreement and he can't be seen to have actually surrendered further on the backstop by creating a frontstop.



I'm getting to the point where I believe this is going to end up — Comical Ali style — with Johnson standing in front of cameras at Warrenpoint Port insisting no checks are happening, while in the background you can see guys performing checks.  Such is the level of duplictousness existing in British politics right now, it wouldn't surprise me at all.



As for the Union, each of the devolved assemblies of Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales has rejected the Boris Agreement and have of course been ignored.  After all, there is nothing in the UK's constitution that would compel the Westminster government to give these rejections any meaningful regard — nor do I imagine any Leaver on here would say that those rejections should in any way delay Brexit. Hence why it has long been galling to hear British Eurosceptics talk about Brussels 'diktats' when the EU functions as a Union of countries much more meaningfully than the UK.

In Wales of course the people voted even more in favour to leave than in England, yet the shitheads in cardiff still seek to thwart the people ...



Their execution will come

[Conchúr]

The point is, as you well know, a blatant attempt to create a European Superstate was thwarted by the Irish republic who were then told they had voted the wrong way and must vote again and this time vote the right way, and someone else whose identity escapes me for now.



We were told we would have a vote too, but the earlier veto brought down that legislation and the European Commissioners invented the Lisbon treaty as it's replacement, and many said - and I was among them - that having read both you could not slide a fag paper between the Lisbon treaty and the unification deal it was supposed to have "replaced"



And moreover, as soon as the Lisbon Treaty was "ratified" (we were denied a vote to veto that, by our treacherous Warmongering European Superstate loving scumbag prime minister who if there is a god will die alone and unloved, of some vile social disease... ) .....no sooner was the Lisbon treaty on the statute books than those same federalist bastards who brought the original federal Superstate paperwork into being were saying openly at the European parliament that they could use the single market to force the federalist dream upon us



Pointless trying to deny it, I was there to hear it said.



That's why I voted to leave the Single Market.



It was in underhand dealings in back rooms made to become far more than it was publicly stated to be.



I would say that this was a repeat of the entire "EEC was nothing more than a common market " lie, but today and for the last two years now I have known Heath knew, and said to a select elite, that what he was signing us up for was much more than that. I know this because I found the white paper and speeches record in Hansard from the 1960s when Britain was rebuffed by De Gaulle and having read the microfiche I now know THAT was a blueprint for full integration of Britain into a European Superstate, and the speeches made by Heath for which transcripts were kept at Chattam House and I now have copies make it clear he "just picked up where the last negotiations left off and intended to run with them unaltered"

The problem here is that your interpretation of the Lisbon Treaty doesn't stack up to what the Treaty has actually done.  The Lisbon Treaty formalised the process for leaving the EU, via the enactment of Article 50.  The understanding was that with deeper integration it became more important for member states to have a formal process by which they could leave the Union should they not wish to remain.  If Lisbon was an attempt to create a superstate, then why did they bother to formalise the process through which the "superstate" could be dissolved? Why did they make the process for leaving more clear-cut?



An example of the effect of the Lisbon Treaty's formalised process for leaving the EU is taking place right before our very eyes, and yet somehow you're trying to portray it that it actually was some underhand federalist conspiracy.  With Brexit however, the "EU federal superstate" argument has died — the UK wanted to leave and is leaving ...and would have left much sooner if the government hadn't spent 3 years lying about the Irish border.  The EU is nothing more than a collection of treaties and cannot act or function beyond the scope of the treaties — i.e. it only has the power which the member states choose to grant it.  As it stands, there is a formalised process for leaving the EU and that can only be removed by amending the Treaties, which requires a unanimous vote of the member states.



So as it stands, the Lisbon Treaty has actually done more to formalise the fact that the EU is not nor is becoming a superstate.  Why? Because as outlined above, revoking Lisbon and its Article 50 process would actually make it more difficult for countries to choose to leave.

[Thomas]

As for the Union, each of the devolved assemblies of Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales has rejected the Boris Agreement and have of course been ignored.

Long may it continue. I have great hopes for the english conservatives ending this union . This outrageously dismissive behaviour by the english conservatives to the rest of us in the other disunited kingdom nations is to be wholly welcomed.



It lets soft unionists neutrals and the like in scotland wales and ireland see where they stand in the pecking order in this democratic wonderfull union of yookay nations dominated by one country.



More of it please , and the sooner the better. :hattip

[Thomas]

One thing that the last 3 years has shown is that those who are waiting for the Brexit process to complete are prepared to take the long view.

so are many others toots , scottish indy supporters , irish reunification supporters , pro europeans etc etc. This is why there will never be compromise and "healing "/ reconciliation that you hoped for.

There are those who love to condemn Brexit voters as nincompoops

Hope this isnt aimed at me toots , i certainly havent. I simply pointed out despite all the empty gestures like ten bob bits and dings on big ben , Friday is merely brexit in name only and not what you all told me you were voting for when you voted brexit.

 but the truth is that they have proved themselves the rather silent majority who even though they were confronted by a GE in the busy run up to Christmas still managed to show the doubters who thought they had it all sewn up yet again, exactly what the majority wanted

The truth is there is no silent uk majority for brexit toots.



England is one of four countries in these islands( one of which is partitioned)and makes up only 40% of the land . Two of the four countries voted for brexit , two didnt , and in the recent general election , lets be clear  , the pro brexit conservative party won 95% of its seats in one country , yours , lost 55% of its seats in my country scotland , could only manage a third of seats in wales , and didnt win any in northern ireland.



So which silent uk majority are you talking about? I cant see any , only an english silent brexit majority.?



You talk about the eu being undemocratic , but there are 28 nations each with a veto to look after their national interests.



Contrast that with "your union" , where only one country , yours , has a veto and constantly overrules the rest , so much so one of those countries fought its way out a century ago by armed rebellion.



I think its clear to see what the more democratic union is.

I am pretty sure that no-one believes that Friday 11pm is the completed work, it is but the first step

So why the celebrations and calls for reconciliation and healing when you have merely begun the process , not ended ?



You have beaten english remainers , northern irish remainers have beaten you and are getting to remain , scotland so far is unresolved , yet you act as though its all over?



This has a long way to run just yet , you havent resolved yookay internal issues outside your own country england never mind started the heavy negotiations with the europeans.



Hence my point it will be interesting to see what pig in a poke , to coin one of your countries phrases , the tories try and sell english brexiters at the end.

[johnofgwent]

Yes OK but again I feel like the point is being missed. I'm not asking anyone here how they feel about the Single Market or membership of the EU, what I am saying is that — on a general point of principle — you don't particularly have any issue with the idea of, to use your own words, unified standards for the production of goods to be consumed (and I imagine also services to be rendered) across multiple countries.  Right ?



So, if you like that idea of unified standards — then that means that you see the value of at least a certain level of regulatory alignment.  You don't like the idea of being part of the full EU, and you don't like the idea of the Single Market being used to "impose" EU rules — but you think there can be a value in unified standards (which is essentially a form of regulatory alignment).  



Even among ardent Brexiteers, there is an acknowledgment of the value of unified standards across nations — and that's precisely where the danger lies for your ideology, you now enter a future where any deal on unifying standards (whether it be with Europe or whoever else) is an arguable compromise on the sovereignty and "freedom" you wanted.  But you aren't going to have much say in it because ultimately nobody will take much notice as boring agreement after boring agreement is signed as part of a slow inexorable process whereby the UK accepts to be bound by rules.  



Once Boris makes Brexit official — the Leave argument dies along with the Remain one.  No more "will of the people".  The government's position will be reset and the future of Brexit will grind along with the movement of capitalism — not the passions of Leavers.  If capitalism leads to more and more alignment, and more and more ruletaking, there won't be much you can do about it.

The point is, as you well know, a blatant attempt to create a European Superstate was thwarted by the Irish republic who were then told they had voted the wrong way and must vote again and this time vote the right way, and someone else whose identity escapes me for now.



We were told we would have a vote too, but the earlier veto brought down that legislation and the European Commissioners invented the Lisbon treaty as it's replacement, and many said - and I was among them - that having read both you could not slide a fag paper between the Lisbon treaty and the unification deal it was supposed to have "replaced"



And moreover, as soon as the Lisbon Treaty was "ratified" (we were denied a vote to veto that, by our treacherous Warmongering European Superstate loving scumbag prime minister who if there is a god will die alone and unloved, of some vile social disease... ) .....no sooner was the Lisbon treaty on the statute books than those same federalist bastards who brought the original federal Superstate paperwork into being were saying openly at the European parliament that they could use the single market to force the federalist dream upon us



Pointless trying to deny it, I was there to hear it said.



That's why I voted to leave the Single Market.



It was in underhand dealings in back rooms made to become far more than it was publicly stated to be.



I would say that this was a repeat of the entire "EEC was nothing more than a common market " lie, but today and for the last two years now I have known Heath knew, and said to a select elite, that what he was signing us up for was much more than that. I know this because I found the white paper and speeches record in Hansard from the 1960s when Britain was rebuffed by De Gaulle and having read the microfiche I now know THAT was a blueprint for full integration of Britain into a European Superstate, and the speeches made by Heath for which transcripts were kept at Chattam House and I now have copies make it clear he "just picked up where the last negotiations left off and intended to run with them unaltered"

[Stevlin]

 

Even among ardent Brexiteers, there is an acknowledgment of the value of unified standards across nations — and that's precisely where the danger lies for your ideology, you now enter a future where any deal on unifying standards (whether it be with Europe or whoever else) is an arguable compromise on the sovereignty and "freedom" you wanted.  But you aren't going to have much say in it because ultimately nobody will take much notice as boring agreement after boring agreement is signed as part of a slow inexorable process whereby the UK accepts to be bound by rules.  

Of course the mutual adoption of standards is a boon towards increasing trade growth.......but WHAT does requiring primacy of legislation have to do with promoting beneficial trade?

Once Boris makes Brexit official — the Leave argument dies along with the Remain one.  No more "will of the people".  The government's position will be reset and the future of Brexit will grind along with the movement of capitalism — not the passions of Leavers.  If capitalism leads to more and more alignment, and more and more ruletaking, there won't be much you can do about it.

You are still ridiculously confusing the adoption of working to standards with requiring legislative primacy....so, again - what other international TRADE agreement  requires primacy of legislation of supposed sovereign countries???

[Stevlin]

Did you mean to respond to me or a different post ? I said nothing about anything being "ruinous".

Apologies Conchur - yes, I incorrectly attributed the post to Gerry, largely because you and he are lies 'peas in a pod' as they say. you make all sorts of unsupported claims, like 'losing independence' - which is EXACTLY what we did when we joined the EU....but perhaps

you could indicate another trade agreement that the UK, or any non-EU country  has signed up to which has ceded the undemocratic right of primacy of legislation? It is THAT right that is unique to the EU which illustrates the ceding of sovereignty,  as other trade agreements are NOT concerned with legislating for so called sovereign countries via an undemocratic, supranational Executive.

The EU has NEVER been just about advantageous trading.....hence the ridiculous formation of a superfluous Parliament, which has NO PLACE whatsoever in a supposed beneficial trading agreement.

Trade Agreements, outside of the EU are fully concerned with advantageous trade, and do NOT get involved with the governance of  member states.......but maybe you could provide a strong case to indicate otherwise.....for a change

[Conchúr]

The single market as a unified standard for the production of goods to be consumed across multiple countries made sense



The single market as a device to impose Brussels' legislation and other demands - in fields that are very much f**k all to do with trade - upon the UK with no right of veto is the reason we are leaving.



As Cameron said in his campaign  to remain, "to leave the eu without also leaving the customs union and single market makes no sense"

Yes OK but again I feel like the point is being missed. I'm not asking anyone here how they feel about the Single Market or membership of the EU, what I am saying is that — on a general point of principle — you don't particularly have any issue with the idea of, to use your own words, unified standards for the production of goods to be consumed (and I imagine also services to be rendered) across multiple countries.  Right ?



So, if you like that idea of unified standards — then that means that you see the value of at least a certain level of regulatory alignment.  You don't like the idea of being part of the full EU, and you don't like the idea of the Single Market being used to "impose" EU rules — but you think there can be a value in unified standards (which is essentially a form of regulatory alignment).  



Even among ardent Brexiteers, there is an acknowledgment of the value of unified standards across nations — and that's precisely where the danger lies for your ideology, you now enter a future where any deal on unifying standards (whether it be with Europe or whoever else) is an arguable compromise on the sovereignty and "freedom" you wanted.  But you aren't going to have much say in it because ultimately nobody will take much notice as boring agreement after boring agreement is signed as part of a slow inexorable process whereby the UK accepts to be bound by rules.  



Once Boris makes Brexit official — the Leave argument dies along with the Remain one.  No more "will of the people".  The government's position will be reset and the future of Brexit will grind along with the movement of capitalism — not the passions of Leavers.  If capitalism leads to more and more alignment, and more and more ruletaking, there won't be much you can do about it.

[johnofgwent]

That's my very point though Cromwell — even among Brexiteers there is an acknowledgement that the Single Market as a concept makes sense.  This is the problem you now have, because once Boris 'gets Brexit done' there is essentially nothing to stop the Tories from going about re-establishing the workings of the old order. All they have to do — and ultimately from what I can see they are great at it — is just keep telling people how hardball they are being. They can make 50p coins and talk about Big Ben Bongs and dish out blue passports, carefully crafting all the patriotic trappings to keep Brexiteers convinced that this government are Brexit purists . . .while subtly maintaining or rebuilding alignment.



So if the Tories achieve Brexit and wax lyrical about how hard they have been, it sounds to me like people will buy into it.  But let's say as the next few years progress, the Tories agree to some boring old agreement on MIFID II or GDPR or Aviation Standards or any other boring thing that the everyday person doesn't get too worked up or emotional over — what will be said then?  Who will actually care ? Ultimately the Tories will say that they have done what the referendum asked — leaving the European Union.  They can then do whatever they want — and with each treaty a little bit more sovereignty is ceded and another rule or set of rules is taken on board.



You've said it yourself, you don't really seem to have an ideological problem with a common market.  But if you want one, you have to abide by its rules.  If you don't want to be a full EU member, then you cede control over having a hand in those rules. This is the war that you now all face as Brexiteers, a constant state of vigilance against a slow process of treaties turning the o a rule taker rather than rulemaker.

The single market as a unified standard for the production of goods to be consumed across multiple countries made sense



The single market as a device to impose Brussels' legislation and other demands - in fields that are very much F@@@ all to do with trade - upon the UK with no right of veto is the reason we are leaving.



As Cameron said in his campaign  to remain, "to leave the eu without also leaving the customs union and single market makes no sense"

[T00ts]

Varadkar is just attempting to get into position for a job in Brussels  when the Irish people give him the boot .  All hot air ,he will fit in fine among the politburo

I don't have quite enough nerve for that observation but it could be right on the button.  ::  ::

[Streetwalker]

Has anyone seen Varadkar's desperation? Once again he is 'playing to the gallery' in the great hope that he will once again be the kingpin in the trade talks. Sorry V the fear is showing once again and something he should digest on the diplomatic front. It doesn't do to insult us!

Varadkar is just attempting to get into position for a job in Brussels  when the Irish people give him the boot .  All hot air ,he will fit in fine among the politburo