Again, you've completely lost me. Who is Paul and who (other than yourself) is getting angry. Can't see any Paul or any anger but yours. Genuinely don't know what you're talking about. Not pretending not to know, really haven't a clue.
It's okay I think I've got it. I've read it several times and have the jist fluent in Scots (it's a UN recognized language suck it up bad boys ) ....It is fin but, you're not speaking it, yours is more like a hallucinogenic induced version of English and talking whilst eating beans on toast The other part I think fin means is that, he has met a bloke called Paul and wants to tell us something?
you cant recognize writing style from one post to another? Paul kavinaugh is wee ginger dug. the way you break stuff down and the way you interpret each point does say an awful lot about you and the way you think noob. it also betrays your lack of exposure to other dialects, forms of writing and alternative view points. but by yer own admission, you have always been a brexiteer, so i doubt you have ever read much outwith yer comfort zone, maybe you glaze over the same way i do noob, tbh, with gimps and into deep also in these types of threads, when you start writing it down as you see it. it's a morbidly depressing style of writing. your laying down of the law noobs, your misinformation littered with personal insults (typed from yer bedroom) is a real durge to get through. i have read plenty of bro brexit stuff but from my side of the constitutional question, rarely do i glaze over or left thinking, goat, what a toss pot. there's plenty on here that are pro brexit that manage to say something without turning it in to a rammy, give it go. it's healthier. indi.
He may as well be ghandis's flip flop fin but he still is not hardly known outside of the snp infactuated indi bubble Sometimes fin, it's not that you are a sweaty but more you go off on rants that I would suggest even those who know you have probably said "he's off again, just give him a few moments and he'll be okay but stand by with a mars bar to top up the energy levels again". Well you say that, the vote of the day was brexit and it was mostly about the U.K.'s future, and future was the key. So like a lot of people in favour of brexit you have to see why would we leave the eu. Despite the remainer projection of knuckle dragging little Englanders who are racist and xenophobic (which has been shown many times to be wrong), we looked at the eu. Not a single remainer 2 years ago could have predicted the mess the eu would be in as it is now. Hollande kicked out, Merkel in her death throws as a politician, shengen falling apart, Italy, Hungary and Austria all electing non eu friendly leaders, 3 years of quantitive easing to the tune of £2.5 trillion to support the ailing euro (which stops in December) the eu failing to do anything with the Ukraine, pissing off Trump by still failing to meet their own nato contributions and much much more. Many people supporting brexit foresaw these type of imploding events and voted that it is a circus we no longer want to be part of. As to comfort zone, you keep saying this fin and everytime it's shown to be pish. I'll read anything, even by your buncha loons, I read many of the european press and media reports and often bring them back in here, your point therefore as it has been when raised many times before, bolloxs I think most will agree fin I am constantly pushing the U.K. has an awful lot to offer the world and some need to stop putting us all down, your approach isn't one I recognise as someone who has had a happy meal. I don't mind being call a toss pot from time to time, wouldn't be the worst name I've been called. I often say though, Happy to be corrected. Most of what I offer is little more than my own opinion and wherever possible I will classify it as that and or, supply links and information for others to see the full event and for those to make their own mind up. I'll tell you what I haven't resorted to fin "I refuse to read any media that does not agree with me as I label it as mainstrean media, but everyone must read these obscure personal blogs who no one has ever heard of but as they agree with me they must be true and if you don't believe them then I will abuse you for being anti Scottish". I have never resorted to that In a game of ping pong, it always takes at least two to play The thing about brexit fin is, many remainers like yourself have constantly painted anyone who voted for brexit as insular little Englander and tories You and those types continually gloss over that many Labour supporters particularly in the midlands and North also voted for brexit, as 44.2% of northern Irish wanted brexit, 38% of Scots wanted to leave and 52.5% of Welsh wanted to leave which smashes your little Englanders claim and constant negative rhetoric about those who voted to leave the eu commission project Beyond that fin, the brexit vote crossed parties, wealth bands, religious bands, colour bands and educational bands and given the mess the eu are in and are going even further into, they made the right choice I feel most brexiteers are thinking and some remainers are now agreeing, thank god we did vote as we did. Now lets just hope a remainer prime minister won't fuck it up
You and those types continually gloss over that many Labour supporters particularly in the midlands and North also voted for brexit, as 44.2% of northern Irish wanted brexit, 38% of Scots wanted to leave and 52.5% of Welsh wanted to leave which smashes your little Englanders claim and constant negative rhetoric about those who voted to leave the eu commission project litlle englanders is not my claim, but i am happy to use it when it come to the kind of vision you promote. 38% of scotland will have heard the promises made by gove, and snack beard, v,few will have heard they are gonna do the opposite and go much further, it takes time for some to come round, they broke the contract they made. that's the crux of it. you and your types continually gloss over the promises made in 2014. and the vote in 1998. your problem with remoaners lies with westminster for A. they way the reff was conducted and B. the way it's been managed. firing in the insults will naturally lead to people digging in their heels. . I'll tell you what I haven't resorted to fin "I refuse to read any media that does not agree with me as I label it as mainstrean media, but everyone must read these obscure personal blogs who no one has ever heard of but as they agree with me they must be true and if you don't believe them then I will abuse you for being anti Scottish". I have never resorted to that i dont believe you. i am forced to read these blogs if i want to see the other point of vuew, many from former bbc and print media jurnos. there is v,lil bar the benefits of brexit up here, there's pretty much a D notice placed on reporting anything negative that might promote the "separatists" position. hence the walk out was required just to get them to report the power grab, for just one day mind. i just wont contribute to click bait. pre oct 2014 i had never visited a website bar DF. quite a few of the comments in these blogs come from retired or resigned jurnos. plenty of good archived links in em. i grew up with an assistant editor of a Glasgow daily that resigned after 2014 due to the way she was encouraged to edit and chose pieces. that and she can make more dosh and keep better hours as a PA for a leading charity right enough. no need to be putting money in the bank of those that promote brexit or make story's up, while ignoring what the opposition is up to is there?.
this is the only indi we will ever see in scotland, the plebs running it now will be out on their ear when the next snap election is called
^ this is what i am talking about. all the polling says 8mp gain. 6 back from the torys to the "separatists". they where bang on last time. but yer man ^ will truly believe what ever is fed to us. 24/7 unquestioning bollox. i get it tho. i was there once.
There should always caution when boasting of membership numbers versus actual voters, Labours situation proves that.
membership numbers? who is talking membership numbers? i'm talking voting intentions. if your reading was as divers as you say, you would know that after 11years, we are pulling away at the polls, again. ferk knows how, they never get a word in. must be something to do with brexit.
Polls are great but as I pointed out the other day fin, the exact same poll company wings uses, is the exact same poll company the msm in Scotland use, depending which media input you read, the snp is up and down. Happy days It's a bit like Pakistan when they were taking money from the U.S. to find Bin Laden, as well as money from Bin Laden to not tell the U.S. he was hiding in Pakistan.
yip, one of many polls conducted by by many pollsters by many different outlets using many different questions to get the answer they want. but if it makes you happy, Ruth,the mooth, Davidson, despite the torys not winning any election in over 65years is gonna be the next FM an David Colburn is gonna be deputy. whats yer thoughts on this? from scot goes pop. . I don't know about anyone else, but I've been rubbing my eyes in disbelief over the last few hours. If you've been listening to the mainstream media's verdict on what was agreed at Chequers, you'd be forgiven for thinking that the fabled Brexit deal that Theresa May has been tasked with striking needed only to be a deal with the rest of her own Cabinet, and not with the European Union. By that rather lower standard, what's just happened might indeed be seen as a stunning personal triumph for the Prime Minister and a guarantee of a (somewhat) softer Brexit, exactly as Stormfront Lite is claiming tonight. The agreement will only be subject to a few modifications if Brussels raises any objections, reveals the Guardian, which apparently believes that the EU has only a limited consultative role in the whole process. It's the old imperial delusion - decisions are things that happen in London. The same commentators who complacently tell us that an indyref is a non-starter because Theresa May will say "no" also apparently believe that it's a mere point of trivia that the EU have already ruled out many elements of May's Brexit proposal. Back in the real world, without the EU's assent there is no deal at all, and that would mean the hardest of hard Brexits. A rare injection of realism was provided by Sam Coates of the Times, who acknowledged that the EU may well still insist on a straight choice between a looser Canada-type deal, and the Norway model that would entail the retention of the single market. But he argued that the Chequers proposal was around 80% of the way towards the Norway model, thus making it that much easier for the Prime Minister to jump towards Norway if forced to choose. What he didn't expand on is the consequence of such a decision. It's highly debatable whether the government really are now 80% of the way towards Norway, but even assuming for the sake of argument that they are, the reason they haven't travelled the remaining 20% of the distance is that doing so would completely breach the red lines on formally leaving the single market and ending freedom of movement. Some say that a soft Brexit is inevitable because there is a natural parliamentary majority for it - but that majority is cross-party in nature, and neither the government nor the Prime Minister are sustained in office on a cross-party basis. I find it inconceivable that a Tory government led by Theresa May could keep Britain in the European Economic Area or retain freedom of movement, even if they wanted to. And if that proves to be correct, there are only really four alternatives - 1) The EU backs down and accepts British cherry-picking of the most desirable aspects of the single market and customs union. This is almost unimaginable because it would create a precedent that Eurosceptics in other member states would try to follow, thus risking the unravelling of the EU. 2) A Canada-type deal is negotiated after all. This is possible, but it would require turning the super-tanker around, because it's clearly not close to what Theresa May has in mind at the moment. It would mean a very hard Brexit in any case. 3) There is no deal at all. 4) The Prime Minister's failure to strike a deal (or a deal that is consistent with her red lines) triggers a political crisis that results in a change of leadership and/or a general election. I can recall at least two previous occasions when we've been told that the PM has made a decisive move towards a soft Brexit, only for us to realise weeks later that there had been no change of any real significance. I fully expect the same to prove true on this occasion.
I'm sure you will take this in the tone it's meant. When you are a big fish in a little pond, you might be impressive such as Ruth, easy to do in a country of 5 ish million people, is she ready to step up or have the ability to manage 65 million? On current basis, no. Not a fan of Coburn who said, dreadful careerists were to blame for the parties 2016 results given he Jumped from ukip to Scottish Tories when he thought his own bacon was on the line. I'd agree pretty much of the rest of your post but with a few points needing clarification. May has a habit of setting a deadline and not meeting it but then, having put herself in a corner with no way out, coming out with "we have agreed " which upon inspection is nothing more than fudges and failures in regards to brexit. 1 agree on. The eu have said all along, 4 pillars or nothing, the uk government were warned of this and has wasted 2 years trying to negotiate with someone who wanted to play snap 2 the eu will not agree any deal unless it allows the eu to still control the key functions of the U.K. 3 should say, we go to wto, remember there are two deals on the table, one leaves us tied to europe which was not the democratic vote and the other makes a clean break, to then work with clearly defined rules under wto which was what was voted for, a clean leave. 4 It's unlikely to lead to another election but might lead to a leader change. Before, the common feeling was who would stand against her but now, it's clear she is swimming with armbands that the air is slowly leaking from. She is out of her depth in regards to brexit. She should not have interfered but left Davis out to carry the roll he was appointed to do. This would have been closer to the leave decision that was voted for. As I mentioned yesterday, it seems that she has looked at the 1970's joining the eec trade body application and submitted that as the brexit softest option that even the eu cannot accept. They were warned the eu was an anti democratic organisation and there is lots of history of the eu overturning nations independent democratic votes but they chose not to listen and now it is backfiring. WTO would have avoided pretty much most of this and had they done this at the beginning, business on both sides would have plans ready to go for next march already.
I'm sure you will take this in the tone it's meant. When you are a big fish in a little pond, you might be impressive such as Ruth, easy to do in a country of 5 ish million people, is she ready to step up or have the ability to manage 65 million? On current basis, no. Not a fan of Coburn who said, dreadful careerists were to blame for the parties 2016 results given he Jumped from ukip to Scottish Tories when he thought his own bacon was on the line. i wasnt expecting that, but i should of known. rape clause ruth is the darling of the tory party, the grandees say so, she has been giving many speeches of late in safe seats in the south. watch this space. colburn has jumped to tories? there is no registered Scottish party bar the SNP, btw. you will have heard the expression, just another tattie in the pot? tho they are making a complete hash of it, organizing and managing services in a country with a population like rUK is considerably easier, with the population density's you have with a supporting media to airbrush certain issues away. why is cobin not doing better in the polls?. it's v,hard to read the rest when you start a piece like that. but i will give it a go
There never was a rape clause as you describe it fin, it was a gimmick by the snp. You know it was about the 2 child limit on benefits and little else. Now, on from the sillyness Colburn has jumped to tories? there is no registered Scottish party bar the SNP, btw. Now I wasn't sure before I made that point so went to the source who would know, the Scottish parliament http://www.parliament.scot/msps/12450.aspx Corbin was the joke candidate when he was entered and nationalising everything and no one paying anything will always get votes until they realise at some point, someone somewhere will have to pay for it. Add communism and marxism, something that even communists are moving away from and you start to see whilst they go one about JRM being from the 1800's. Corbyn wants to go back to a time when the country was on it's knees' winter of discontent" anybody? Said it many times and the polls support the general drive of this, no matter how much people dislike the tories, Labour will never get in Government whilst Corbyn and his marxist cronies are running what is left of Labour.
" We don’t yet know whether Brexiteers in the Conservative party will seek to bring down the Prime Minister Theresa May over the UK negotiating position that she forced through Cabinet on Friday. We don’t yet know whether the EU will accept her “compromise” package or will reject it with the contempt they have shown until now at any suggestion of a “pick and mix” approach to the EU’s customs union and rules. But what we can say with near-certainty is that what Mrs May has done is put in serious doubt a Conservative victory at the next general election – and maybe at any further general election for a long time after that. For she and her cowardly and faithless colleagues have betrayed Brexit voters, betrayed democracy and betrayed the British people. In voting as they did on June 23 2016 to leave the EU, the British people made a solemn declaration of belief in the value of democratic sovereignty, national self-government and Britain regaining the power to decide its own laws, to conduct its own trade deals in the best interests of the country, and to rule itself once again with its own policies passed by its own parliament as the independent nation it once was. Ever since that historic vote the Remainers – who by definition do not value democratic self-government and national sovereignty which they are all too happy to see subsumed under EU control – have sought every means possible to undermine and reverse the Brexit vote. On Friday, they succeeded. This was a Remainer coup. Ms May is insisting that her package would deliver Brexit. This is false. It would leave the UK tied to a number of EU policies and thus unable to make policy in such areas for itself; it would destroy the UK’s ability to negotiate trade deals in the best interests of the nation; it would leave the UK still to some extent under the thumb of the European Court of Justice. Thus the UK would remain deprived of national sovereignty and the power to govern itself as an independent nation. Moreover, Mrs May’s package would leave the UK in a worse position even than as a member of the EU. For under her terms, the UK would be bound by a number of EU rules and policies but with no say over them at all. (Indeed, some Remainers fantasise that engineering just an outcome would fuel pressure for a second referendum and a vote to stay in – ignoring the fact that there can be no return to the status quo ante, since the triumphant EU would insist that, in order to remain, the bloodied UK would have to abolish the pound and join the Euro.) Does Mrs May understand this? Is she Machiavelli in kitten heels – or is she just too narrow-minded, too incapable of grasping any big idea other than the survival of her government, too personally defensive, too psychologically clenched against viewpoints that challenge her own to be remotely competent? The idea that problems such as the Northern Ireland border are otherwise simply insuperable is absurd. The fact remains that Britain held – and still holds – the major card in its own hands. The EU needs Britain more than Britain needs the EU. That doesn’t mean there are no downsides from leaving: of course there are. But a real leader would have said to the country something like this: “Look, there are going to be hiccups and problems and we may well have to bite on a few painful bullets. But the upside is that, overall, our economic future is very bright indeed if we make the cleanest possible break; and politically, we will once again be independent and in charge of our own laws and destiny. And for that most precious of all gifts we will pay a price if we have to, just as this country has always buckled down and paid a price for liberty – which is really what Britain is fundamentally all about”. And to the EU, such a real leader would have said something like this: “The people of Britain have spoken and we are now leaving you. We will not seek a deal; we will take our chances with WTO rules and tariffs because even with all that we’ll still take you to the economic cleaners; but if you would like to offer us a deal, you’ll find our door is always open because we’ll always be your friends. Good bye!” In the event, Mrs May’s negotiating position was beyond risible. She dismissed the innate strength of her country relative to the EU economic and political basket-case and instead – incredibly – approached the (possibly terminally) stricken Brussels behemoth as a nervous supplicant. Unsurprisingly, the EU promptly punched Britain in the solar plexus and is now preparing to kick it in the head. As for the Brexiteers in Cabinet, they are all been revealed as beyond pathetic. According to media reports, as Friday’s marathon meeting wore on – after a brief, flailing and juvenile eruption by Boris Johnson – they all ended up supporting this appalling travesty. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that they were all measuring their leadership ambitions against each other and so collectively were unable to present a united front. It was self-interest first, national interest last. Not one of them has resigned. “Friends” of Boris Johnson say he can do more to fight for Brexit by staying within Cabinet. Really? He has now put his name to Brexit’s betrayal. He will not be forgiven. All these people have now shown themselves unworthy of leading their party. They do not deserve to be in office; the Conservative party no longer deserves to be in government. People are rightly worried that Jeremy Corbyn, Labour’s far-left leader, may become Prime Minister. That fear has helped Mrs May fight off any possible challengers. Jeremy Corbyn has been her human shield. But here’s the thing. If the choice is to be between Mrs May’s Brexit betrayal and a Corbyn government, many may well now be thinking they’d either actually prefer Corbyn, who at least remains personally hostile to UK membership of the EU – or far more lethally, that there’s no longer much point in trying to stop him. Because if Britain really is to remain tied to the EU, the UK parliament will increasingly become no more significant than Westminster regional council within the Brussels empire. So who cares if Corbyn becomes Prime Minister, this thinking would go, since the EU won’t let him do half of what he wants to do anyway? And that’s the worst danger of all from this debacle: that the British people will simply lose faith not just in the wretched Conservative party but in the democratic process which will become increasingly meaningless. That said, this thing is far from over; indeed, it may have only just begun. For if the EU sticks to its previous intransigence, it will reject the British government’s offer and insist that it makes further concessions to the EU’s rules which even Mrs May dare not make. Which means, prepare now for “no deal”. Which Britain should have done right from the start. But however this finally ends, Mrs May and her craven colleagues have done real damage – to themselves as politicians, to the Conservative party and to democracy itself. http://www.melaniephillips.com/faithless-craven-cowardly-british-brexit-betrayal/
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/08/electoral-law-broken-fight-for-soul-of-democracy Rig an election however and not only can you continue in Govt but no one turns a blind bit of notice. Imagine if Remain had won through doing the same thing????????? I can guarantee that riots on the streets are not far away.
There never was a rape clause as you describe it fin, it was a gimmick by the snp. You know it was about the 2 child limit on benefits and little else. yip, unless you disclose you where raped, fill in a form stating the child's name, the fathers if its known, along with a pile of other info. which could obviously lead to all sorts if mistakes, it's also to reduce the likelihood of claims being made in the first place. ester mcvile has nothing on you dude aye, just a wee formality. a gimmick. chose an opinion that best suit yer needs. https://www.google.com/search?q=the+rape+clause&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b anyhoo, i think it should be obvious by now i dont give a ferk what you think, its junk, fact light, spin heavy, straight from the book of bluster. keeping you busy and engineering convo's is easy with yersel. i had a wee nap, now i am heading off shortly for a few days, the floor is yours.
There will be no riots in the streets. What will happen is that Prices Law will apply (square root of the population are responsible for 50% of productive ideas) . Those that drive the economy will leave over time, this will result in a further decline in UK’s global ranking. The impacts of Brexit will be long term and will leave the UK poorer in relative terms. Would’ve been much more sensible to change the EU from within....but we’re not that smart (but more than capable). An opportunity lost.
