So Ner!

[srb7677]

The only caricature is in your fevered imagination,I don't read nor rely on the mail that often and the tories are a convenience......for now.

And me right wing?.....yeah as true as I called you a nazi.

I apologised for the Nazi error already. You might have missed it because it was the last post on a previous page. I know you were not calling me a Nazi.

A big difference between us though is that I have never - and will never - vote Tory. Convenient or not.

You have your precious Brexit now for good or ill. No one in Labour except a tiny minority of Blairite fools is seriously advocating Rejoin. Rejoining is never going to become a popular call at least until a decade or two has passed, if ever. So what further reason do you have to continue voting Tory now? Do you need to keep voting for these right wing scumbags through fear of a betrayal to the wicked EU otherwise? Does the EU really colour everything for you? Because my ideals, hopes and aspirations are far less narrow than that, and indeed Leave/Remain only ever informs a small part of my thinking. I am not obsessed with it to the exclusion of all else. I feel much more strongly about housing than I do the EU, for example - in or out.

[DeppityDawg]

And me right wing?.....yeah as true as I called you a nazi.

About as right wing as Ken Clarke 

[cromwell]

Now you choose to believe the Daily Mail instead, so any manifestation of Labour is never going to be acceptable to you because the Mail will make sure of it.

I have said this before and it ought to be pretty obvious to anyone but you yourself it seems, but you have moved to the right with old age and your choice of reading material reflects that. Just another Tory-voting, Mail reading, pensioner, obsessed with the wickedness of the EU and the loathsomeness of Labour. You have become a caricature.

Incidentally, my views on Labour are mixed. Am not actually sure how much longer I will remain in the party, and stay only because i thereby keep my party voting rights. But I have no time at all for Starmer who is surrounding himself with Blairite careerists and seems set to lead us in a wrong direction without delivering much in the way of electoral success. He is even advised now by that toad Peter Mandelson. We barely oppose the government much of the time. I suspect a very poor Labour performance in the local elections in May.

What the centrists fail to understand is that the formula for success that worked for them in electoral terms is broken now. It relied on taking both working class voters and left wing progressive voters for granted on the assumption that they had nowhere else to go. And it worked for a long time because many were reluctant to give up on the party at first. But now neither the working class nor left wing progressives can be relied upon to support Labour, and thus any drift to overt Blairism and appeal to the right will likely lose at least as many votes as it gains.

On a personal note, I can only say this under the cover of anonymity, but I have no intention of voting for my local Labour candidate in May since she is a careerist in it for herself and a solid Starmer backer. She is also a staunch Remainer in a solidly Leave ward and not even a local. She is up against a Tory who is a local and is active and well known in the community, formerly a Ukipper. She stands no chance. Unlike some former Labour voters around here I will never betray my principles so much as to ever vote Tory, and will not trust the Lib Dems who locally have a habit of defecting to the Tories. I probably won't vote unless there is an independent to my liking.

The only caricature is in your fevered imagination,I don't read nor rely on the mail that often and the tories are a convenience......for now.

And me right wing?.....yeah as true as I called you a nazi.

[srb7677]

With regards to gullibility I once shared yours that labour actually would do what they promised for ordinary people.

Now you choose to believe the Daily Mail instead, so any manifestation of Labour is never going to be acceptable to you because the Mail will make sure of it.

I have said this before and it ought to be pretty obvious to anyone but you yourself it seems, but you have moved to the right with old age and your choice of reading material reflects that. Just another Tory-voting, Mail reading, pensioner, obsessed with the wickedness of the EU and the loathsomeness of Labour. You have become a caricature.

Incidentally, my views on Labour are mixed. Am not actually sure how much longer I will remain in the party, and stay only because i thereby keep my party voting rights. But I have no time at all for Starmer who is surrounding himself with Blairite careerists and seems set to lead us in a wrong direction without delivering much in the way of electoral success. He is even advised now by that toad Peter Mandelson. We barely oppose the government much of the time. I suspect a very poor Labour performance in the local elections in May.

What the centrists fail to understand is that the formula for success that worked for them in electoral terms is broken now. It relied on taking both working class voters and left wing progressive voters for granted on the assumption that they had nowhere else to go. And it worked for a long time because many were reluctant to give up on the party at first. But now neither the working class nor left wing progressives can be relied upon to support Labour, and thus any drift to overt Blairism and appeal to the right will likely lose at least as many votes as it gains.

On a personal note, I can only say this under the cover of anonymity, but I have no intention of voting for my local Labour candidate in May since she is a careerist in it for herself and a solid Starmer backer. She is also a staunch Remainer in a solidly Leave ward and not even a local. She is up against a Tory who is a local and is active and well known in the community, formerly a Ukipper. She stands no chance. Unlike some former Labour voters around here I will never betray my principles so much as to ever vote Tory, and will not trust the Lib Dems who locally have a habit of defecting to the Tories. I probably won't vote unless there is an independent to my liking.

[DeppityDawg]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.eu/article/the-key-differences-between-the-eu-and-uk-astrazeneca-contracts/amp/


Here's an interesting claim.


English law used by the UK is actually better at getting results than Belgian law.


Seems leaving the EU was a good idea after all

I was going to post that article myself, but I'm on my phone and I can never do it from this fecking antique. 

Not that there's any point because he won't read it. We've had a thread on it and he ignored anything that wasn't a glowing reference of EU idealism. Or that wasnt porn of Guy Verhofsdat in leather lederhosen   

[cromwell]

You are unlikely to persuade me of anything but your own gullibility if you insist upon quoting the Daily Mail at me.

You are obsessed with the mail,which btw has from time to time altered its stance on brexit (ask the grauniad) and still can't answer the euro outlets reports.

With regards to gullibility I once shared yours that labour actually would do what they promised for ordinary people.

[srb7677]

No what you need to understand is I don't have to think carefully before presenting a source to you I couldn't give a rats if you approve of it or not

You are unlikely to persuade me of anything but your own gullibility if you insist upon quoting the Daily Mail at me.

[srb7677]

Have you lost the plot,where have I called you a Nazi,and as per my subsequent post the news outlets were all European,go to specsavers ffs.

Apologies. You were describing yourself and others like you as Nazi gammons - insinuating that this is what I think of you. You were not actually calling me a Nazi.

For the record I do not regard you as a Nazi. I don't regard you as a gammon either. The defining characteristic of a gammon is an older male thicko. You are not a thicko. Though you do place far too much faith in dubious news outlets, so in that sense come across as a little bit gullible. It is easy to put a lot of faith in something that is telling you what you want to hear, but not always wise.

[cromwell]

You may have quoted a handful of European papers, though again that is an example of excessive trust in the newsprint media - or carefully selected segments of it - in the EU.

But in your post that I originally quoted you specifically refered to "the British papers" as a major souce of info.

As for me giving the Daily Mail the benefit of the doubt, I have learned that it is a very dishonest rag with an often negative political agenda and much of it's commentary is politically loaded propaganda. I tend to require verification from a more reliable source for any politically motivated story I first see there. I don't automatically assume it's a lie. But I definitely don't automatically assume it is the full unvarnished truth either. Hence my need for verification from a more reliable source, rather than accepting it at face value.

Lesson you need to learn is that when it comes to persuading me with quotes, quoting a source you know I have minimal trust in is not the most persuasive move you could ever make. It tends instead to undermine your own credibility in my eyes. If you want to convince me with a quote, you would be far more effective if you quoted a reliable source. You might be naive enough to trust any old shite printed in the Daily Mail simply because it tells you what you want to hear - your opinions on many things seem to confirm that - but please try and understand that I am a lot less trusting of it than you are. With good reason.

No what you need to understand is I don't have to think carefully before presenting a source to you I couldn't give a rats if you approve of it or not,and you don't only hear what you want to hear?and like Gerry dismiss the European news outlets because they're saying things you don't want to hear.


Found where I called you a Nazi yet?

[srb7677]

The fact that I quoted all European outlets in that post including one Irish paper seems like Gerry to have escaped you,no surprise then........pulled the ripcord yet?,course not.

You may have quoted a handful of European papers, though again that is an example of excessive trust in the newsprint media - or carefully selected segments of it - in the EU.

But in your post that I originally quoted you specifically refered to "the British papers" as a major souce of info.

As for me giving the Daily Mail the benefit of the doubt, I have learned that it is a very dishonest rag with an often negative political agenda and much of it's commentary is politically loaded propaganda. I tend to require verification from a more reliable source for any politically motivated story I first see there. I don't automatically assume it's a lie. But I definitely don't automatically assume it is the full unvarnished truth either. Hence my need for verification from a more reliable source, rather than accepting it at face value.

Lesson you need to learn is that when it comes to persuading me with quotes, quoting a source you know I have minimal trust in is not the most persuasive move you could ever make. It tends instead to undermine your own credibility in my eyes. If you want to convince me with a quote, you would be far more effective if you quoted a reliable source. You might be naive enough to trust any old shite printed in the Daily Mail simply because it tells you what you want to hear - your opinions on many things seem to confirm that - but please try and understand that I am a lot less trusting of it than you are. With good reason.

[johnofgwent]

The EU also has contracts with companies, AZ included. But AZ is delinquent in fulfilling this. AZ have said their contract with the UK excludes them from shipping outside the UK until all vaccine deliveries to the UK are complete. Your listening to more UK rag press, you really need to stop that and try get some more reliable sources for your info. The EU spent billions on the pre purchase of vaccines not yet developed. The difference with the UK is it abandoned science and started to pump people with vaccines not properly tested, that's how the UK got ahead of the game. It worked, well done, but that tactic won't work all the time. Why do you think the UK gave AZ a full indemnity against any and all side affects from their vaccine.

This is why we have the situation of the EU looking to prevent any EU manufactured vaccines being shipped to countries such as the UK that act in such bad faith. But whats new, you have Johnson breaking intentional law twice and now being sued by the EU, why stop at that, the UK hoarding vaccines and laughing at others that don't produce their own, disgraceful behaviour from a developed country.
The EU will continue to manufacture vaccines and will continue to deliver to countries that need them in parallel to looking after it's own people. Early days yet, lets see where things sit come June or July.

Who do you think had a contract first with AZ, the EU or the UK ?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.eu/article/the-key-differences-between-the-eu-and-uk-astrazeneca-contracts/amp/


Here's an interesting claim.


English law used by the UK is actually better at getting results than Belgian law.


Seems leaving the EU was a good idea after all

[cromwell]

Your faith in the British press is touching but naive. Especially in the case of the fecking Daily Mail.

As for Thornberry what the feck does she have to do with anything? My disdain for her does not really relate to her position on the EU - much as you act and think like that is all that matters - but to her middle class snobbery towards the working classes.

If you insist upon calling yourself a gammon I won't stop you, but it is you doing so not me. It is however a demographic fact that your generation is the one that still buys - and believes in - much of the newsprint media. I notice in my workplace all the time that most of those who buy the newspapers in general - and the Daily Mail in particular - tend to be people of a certain age. So my talk of your generation's gullibility in regards to the newsprint media is not at all misplaced, however much you try to insult me by calling me a Nazi for saying so.

Have you lost the plot,where have I called you a Nazi,and as per my subsequent post the news outlets were all European,go to specsavers ffs.

[srb7677]

And one bit taken out of the context that to Gerry all British newspapers are rags and the BBC is all lies when it suits.

My generation? What stupid thick Nazi gammons,sod off stevie boy.

I ain't going to defend the mail or any other news outlet to someone like you who predetermines that if its in a particular paper it must be a lie,you must've forgot your very old forum signature "a mind like a parachute works best when open"

Definitely closed because your long whinges that all on here are right wing because they voted in a referendum in way you didn't like........much the same thinking as Thornberry who though you purport to disdain share the same views.

Your problem Steve is your innate sense of a superior mind to al others views or opinions.

Your faith in the British press is touching but naive. Especially in the case of the fecking Daily Mail.

As for Thornberry what the feck does she have to do with anything? My disdain for her does not really relate to her position on the EU - much as you act and think like that is all that matters - but to her middle class snobbery towards the working classes.

If you insist upon calling yourself a gammon I won't stop you, but it is you doing so not me. It is however a demographic fact that your generation is the one that still buys - and believes in - much of the newsprint media. I notice in my workplace all the time that most of those who buy the newspapers in general - and the Daily Mail in particular - tend to be people of a certain age. So my talk of your generation's gullibility in regards to the newsprint media is not at all misplaced, however much you try to insult me by calling me a Nazi for saying so.

[cromwell]

Throughout the last few pages of this debate, Gerry has been the voice of reason against anti-EU obsessives spouting their Daily Mail inspired shite. Cromwell cannot even back up his claim that von der Lyon is a liar, citing an allegedly poor performanance when in charge of the Bundewehr, and an already disproven claim about plagiarism. And laughably he cites as his source for much of his info about her - and presumably the EU as a whole - the British papers, hahaha.

The fact that I quoted all European outlets in that post including one Irish paper seems like Gerry to have escaped you,no surprise then........pulled the ripcord yet?,course not.

[Thomas]

Your problem Steve is your innate sense of a superior mind to al others views or opinions.

...and long may it continue with labour and their supporters taking that superior mindset to us mere plebs.