Brexit, for once some facts.

[Zlatan]

Abstaining suggests it was something more than just can't be bothered or don't care..

Its impossible to decide why folk abstain, besides it didn't really affect result.
Had result been closer they could have argued all aspects had been weighed up, including representing constituents and knowledge of situation. As it is they simply followed party line. Hardly a way to get best result for country but certainly one to please leaders.
What is the point of Corbyn ?

 

[oldgroaner]

MPs voted to keep their coveted places and all it brings in for them. Do you think they voted taking into account the socio-economic considerations or the democratic ones? Because they did neither. They voted to keep their incomes. They sold out.

Didn't I say that first?
"
Actually it rather proves my point that they are all members of the same club and put themselves first second and last.
It's a cushy number being an MP, something that they dare not risk for a principle

#10553oldgroaner, Today at 7:02 AM.

That memory of yours is getting worse! can't you remember something you rated as Funny two hours ago?
If it was funny then why are you agreeing now?

 

[tillson]

Binary? Perhaps, but capable of making a logical decision, and knowing the difference between a gamble and a safe choice.
Why should I accept anything less than the obviously correct path,?
I leave that to those among us unable or unwilling to stick to their principles.

Of course this relies on the assumption that yours is the correct path and that is by no means certain. Remaining in the EU is only a safe choice from your point of view and other people who favour remain. But what about people who favour leaving the EU? Others do not share the same level of confidence in continued EU membership, so you can not proclaim EU membership to be safe and BREXIT to be a gamble.

Clearly yours are elastic to the point that if this Brexit turns out badly you will forget your early enthusiasm for it, as evidenced by the "Climb Down" you have made..

I am prepared to eat humble pie and admit that I made a wrong choice if BREXIT turns out badly. I have never considered there to be any shame in making a wrong decision. The environment that I work in promotes a culture of admitting mistakes, sharing them and learning the lessons. It's essential for safety. I see that you prefer a blame and ridicule type of approach. I'm sorry, but I can't subscribe to that, it's contrary to how I work.

How different from the consistency of my position on the subject.
Now, no matter what decision is reached, you have positioned your self to say
"That was what I really wanted all along"
Because you can't accept you made a wrong decision, can you?

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

A lot of what I have said above apples here. You need to be careful that your consistent approach doesn't turn into mule stubbornness.

My approach is to gather information, make a decision, monitor the affect, re-evaluate, gather information, make a decision, monitor the affect....... It's an ongoing process which requires the decision maker to adopt a flexible approach. Again, I believe that your stubborn & inflexible approach is dangerous, particularly when coupled with what appears to be a deeply engrained sense of shame associated with the re-evaluation process.

My stance at this time is very firmly on the side of leave, where it has always been. Information gathering and re-evaluation phases are ongoing and if a remain deal is available which gives the UK very attractive terms, I am prepared to alter my decision.

This is just an example to illustrate the principle, an end to free movement, access to the single market, no further EU subscriptions, abolition of Human Rights Act etc etc. Feed this into the re-evaluate - decision phase and the decision outcome may be different.

Can you see how it works?

 

[oldgroaner]

Its impossible to decide why folk abstain, besides it didn't really affect result.
Had result been closer they could have argued all aspects had been weighed up, including representing constituents and knowledge of situation. As it is they simply followed party line. Hardly a way to get best result for country but certainly one to please leaders.
What is the point of Corbyn ?

There is a tradition in any "Court" of having a "Jester"?
AKA The "Official opposition"
This is a ruse to convince the public that this is not actually a one party state.
Corbyn hasn't proved to be the leader that it needed to make the opposition party actually oppose anything (barring itself of course)
Somehow he reminds me of you......

 

[Zlatan]

There is a tradition in any "Court" of having a "Jester"?
AKA The "Official opposition"
This is a ruse to convince the public that this is not actually a one party state.
Corbyn hasn't proved to be the leader that it needed to make the opposition party actually oppose anything (barring itself of course)
Somehow he reminds me of you......

Hang on OG...there are insults but that is below the belt...

 

[oldgroaner]

My approach is to gather information, make a decision, monitor the affect, re-evaluate, gather information, make a decision, monitor the affect....... It's an ongoing process which requires the decision maker to adopt a flexible approach. Again, I believe that your stubborn & inflexible approach is dangerous, particularly when coupled with what appears to be a deeply engrained sense of shame associated with the re-evaluation process.

My stance at this time is very firmly on the side of leave, where it has always been

Apologies tillson I mixed up a post to Zlatan with one from you, now removed, an 'I'll point it at the right recipient, however.

You too are trying to appear on both sides by qualifying your early enthusiasm, I can agree whole heartedly with you doing so, but not with you implying you held this view all along

 

[oldgroaner]

Hang on OG...there are insults but that is below the belt...

Yes, I humbly apologise to Corbyn.
Satisfied now?

 

[tillson]

My, my, what a load of old cobblers and a lie too
You announced that you didn't actually Vote in the Referendum remember?

What do you call a person that backdates a decision he didn't make at the time of the referendum as being "Firmly on the side of leave"
And further qualifies that
"I am prepared to eat humble pie and admit that I made a wrong choice if BREXIT turns out badly.

But you didn't make a Choice at all because you couldn't make your mind up and now want to be on the "Winning side"
Give it a rest!

And all that psycho babble is just to cover up how indecisive you were when it counted, in the knowledge you won't have to apologise for voting for a failed Brexit
As you never as you have admitted yourself in your early posts
Voted for it anyway
The word for a person like that ? Imposter of course.
By your actions shall we know thee.

OG, are you confusing me with someone else? I did vote in the referendum and I voted to leave the EU. My stated position has always been on the side of leaving and that is where it is today.

If I have stated on here that I didn't vote in the referendum, then I would appreciate it if you could point me to the post. You have called me a liar so I think you need to do that.

 

[oldgroaner]

OG, are you confusing me with someone else? I did vote in the referendum and I voted to leave the EU. My stated position has always been on the side of leaving and that is where it is today.

If I have stated on here that I didn't vote in the referendum, then I would appreciate it if you could point me to the post. You have called me a liar so I think you need to do that.

Yes I was tillson, and I have apologised and removed that post, I told you my IQ was slipping didn't I?
I have provided a new post to provoke you with, (with my best wishes of course)
It was of course intended for Ztalan, and now I have to do it all again, though perhaps the effort would be wasted.

 

[Gubbins]

Its impossible to decide why folk abstain, besides it didn't really affect result.
Had result been closer they could have argued all aspects had been weighed up, including representing constituents and knowledge of situation. As it is they simply followed party line. Hardly a way to get best result for country but certainly one to please leaders.
What is the point of Corbyn ?

It's just that the word abstaining suggests a deliberate intent not to vote .all those I know who didn't vote was because they couldn't be bothered.

 

[flecc]

an end to free movement, access to the single market, no further EU subscriptions, abolition of Human Rights Act

I understand the first three being wanted by you, but why the Human Rights Act which has done so much good and prevented so much that is wrong?

None of those opposing it now said anything against it until David Cameron had his rant, wanting his Bill of Rights. Lack of rights more likely, doubtless engineered to let him abuse at will.

In any case, losing the Human Rights Act won't necessarily have the effect he wanted, since there's the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights backing up our act.
.

 

[oldgroaner]

It's just that the word abstaining suggests a deliberate intent not to vote .all those I know who didn't vote was because they couldn't be bothered.

No doubt true in many cases

 

[Woosh]

I understand the first three being wanted by you, but why the Human Rights Act which has done so much good and prevented so much that is wrong?

None of those opposing it now said anything against it until David Cameron had his rant, wanting his Bill of Rights. Lack of rights more likely, doubtless engineered to let him abuse at will.

In any case, losing the Human Rights Act won't necessarily have the effect he wanted, since there's the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights backing up our act.
.

I thought he meant to opt out of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR and ECtHR).
Two contentious points wind up the zealots: respect for family life and freedom of expression.

 

[Gubbins]

Another observation.. I have come across a lot of animosity towards myself because I voted out , in fact at a recent party when the subject came up (as it does) I was told that I was the only person she had met that dare admit to voting Brexit.. In fact I voted out! To leave the EU!.. Brexit wasn't on the voting form and seems to me to be a word invented almost as a derogatory term.
When being involved in discussions I find that people who wanted to stay tend to be more aggressive and insulting than those who want to leave.
And as for Human Rights.. I generally dont get involved in this, but I do read about non British violent criminals being able to use it to have a cushy life here rather than face the music at home..

 

[oldgroaner]

Another observation.. I have come across a lot of animosity towards myself because I voted out , in fact at a recent party when the subject came up (as it does) I was told that I was the only person she had met that dare admit to voting Brexit.. In fact I voted out! To leave the EU!.. Brexit wasn't on the voting form and seems to me to be a word invented almost as a derogatory term.
When being involved in discussions I find that people who wanted to stay tend to be more aggressive and insulting than those who want to leave.
And as for Human Rights.. I generally dont get involved in this, but I do read about non British violent criminals being able to use it to have a cushy life here rather than face the music at home..

Strange that aggression seems to be so prevalent in the right wing press against remainers then , don't you think?
And that propaganda about the human rights act is straight out of one of those papers, isn't it?
Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

 

[Gubbins]

Strange that aggression seems to be so prevalent in the right wing press against remainers then , don't you think?

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

Don't know. I read the daily mail on line is all. But I was mostly talking about my own experiences . And on here of course the comments put forward by remainers seem ..well. bordering on nasty sometimes..

 

[oldgroaner]

Don't know. I read the daily mail on line is all. But I was mostly talking about my own experiences . And on here of course the comments put forward by remainers seem ..well. bordering on nasty sometimes..

Perhaps you are looking at things with a partisan viewpoint,?
Both sides engage in a little rough and tumble in about even measure on here

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

 

[Gubbins]

Strange that aggression seems to be so prevalent in the right wing press against remainers then , don't you think?
And that propaganda about the human rights act is straight out of one of those papers, isn't it?
Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

It's not true then?

 

[oldgroaner]

It's not true then?

Not really, it is verbal sparring, nothing more, nothing less
We are all after all anxious for the best outcome for the nation, just differ on the direction needed to get there.

There are some recognisably "Normal"people on here such as Kudos Dave, KTM and Woosh that struggle against the tide and try to have a rational debate, but the odds are against this as first of all Brexit doesn't lend itself to rational duscussion, and the rest have the cast are well "Individuals" and just love verbal fisticuffs

And this form of free debate is habit forming, as Ztalan can agree (or more likely disagree) as he came on here a considerable time ago making similar observations to yours (with embellishments) and is now part of the furniture, providing a vital asset to the debate that I would miss if he deserted us.

For if I fail t get a "Disagree" from him response when I post, I make sure that I try harder to earn one next time.
tillson and old tom are the resident Waldorf and Statler of the show which without their particular flair for colourful invective would have ground to a halt long ago.

As a cameo tillson and zlatan slip into their alter ego's as Batman and Robin.

Flecc (who created the thread) takes the part of Moses and parts the sea from time to time, to remind us that despite our best efforts there is still one among us able to use intelligence for something other than getting a laugh.


And my part in all this is to play the Joker and attempt to slip a Whoopee Cushion under tillson when he sits down with more than his usual vigour and lob the occasional Custard Pie at Zlatan.

The moral of this story is that the papers have convinced the public that any debate that isn't utterly PC and polite to the point of banality is evidence of "HATE and MALICE"
Utter nonsense!

Read carefully and you will see there is goodwill and humour as well as cutting comments, though debates like this are NOT for the faint hearted
.
We are all friends on here ( and if you disagree with that Zlatan it will be TWO custard pies for you!)


Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

 

[flecc]

I thought he meant to opt out of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR and ECtHR).
Two contentious points wind up the zealots: respect for family life and freedom of expression.

That also, but he specifically wanted to scrap the Human Rights Act and replace it with a Bill of Rights. On his first speech on that he cited the case of Abu Qatada who appealed against deportation using the act. This led to delays, but Jordanian Qatada in the end left voluntarily without a court having to deport him

Theresa May has also confirmed she wants to scrap the Human Rights Act, but has not mentioned a replacement bill to my knowledge.

I'm satisfied that Qatada et al are not the reason for wanting to scrap the act. From 1994 to 2003 parliament enacted three laws which themselves are illegal since they breach both UK and EU laws. Since mainland EU countries have citizens living in the UK, they monitor UK legislation which might affect their peoples, In this connection Germany, France and Italy have all ruled that the acts are illegal, the offending acts in breach of the Human Rights Act.

It means the government should extensively change those acts to comply with preceding UK and EU law, one of them immensely complex. They don't want to do that so want the simple expedient of scrapping the Human Rights Act, replacing it with a Bill of Rights which permits the offending laws as being legal.
.