Deleted User wrote: » Climate change is a fact. Even if it weren't, we should hasten our advance toward a green-based economy, given the omnipresent advantages that it brings re: the environment, health, jobs etc. Personally, I believe that climate change is irreversible, but I'm still in favour of green politics regardless (see above). In terms of the "bleeding heart" or "racist", they are extremes. My view is that immigration is a net positive to a country; an absolute necessity for a modern, global economy. All we ask is that we control borders, and not leave them open; in the same way we monitor who comes into our home, without saying that nobody should enter at all. So, there are reasonable voices here. Unfortunately on this forum, you will find extremists who are unwavering in their political commitments - many of whom have shown no capacity to be at least willing to alter the way they consider these arguments.I've had many people DM me saying that they agree with my views, but are unwilling to put their heads above the parapet here given what you will be subjected to. That's how bad things have gotten.
liamtech wrote: » For EskimoHunthttp://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/themes/55fd82d8ebad646cec000001/attachments/original/1463496002/Why_Vote_Leave.pdf?1463496002 Page 11https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xGt3QmRSZY Throughout this videohttps://fullfact.org/europe/what-was-promised-about-customs-union-referendum/ throughout this fact checkhttps://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/29/what-vote-leave-leaders-really-said-about-no-deal-brexit throughout There are plenty more Eskimohunt but please do read the above, and watch the video SO i ask you again - please provide clear detailed evidence that the Vote Leave campaign was all about this hard BrexitNOTE - i am posting this in the appropriate thread as the Mod has rightly suggested we not replay the 2016 Ref - again - and again
liamtech wrote: » And i have REPEATEDLY posted asking you to address these obvious instances where that is proven to be a false assertion BY the way i don't believe that our debate/disagreement has ever become significantly personalized - so again i would love to hear from people who agree with your position -
Deleted User wrote: » Furthermore, here is Nigel Farage talking about the Norway option in its full context and how it's perfect for what Norway has independently chosen to do, but it's not something that Farage wants for the UK (first 1min 45 seconds) From 2 min 34 seconds, Nigel Farage declares that he does not want the UK to be a member of the single market This is what happens when the Remain side is exposed to facts they did not know existed. Inside their own bubble of propaganda, they've rechurned these canards about the single market without having done an iota of research beyond a silly YouTube collection of misquotes. You didn't listen to that. Otherwise you would have realised that Farage literally lied literally five seconds later. He told a blatant lie in the same sentence as he spoke about the SM. Pathetic. Here is Michael Gove talking about the need to "leave the Single Market". Here's a quote from that article: "On trading, he said the UK would be part of the European free trade zone with access to the European single market but "free from EU regulation which costs us billions of pounds a year". A blatant lie. Pathetic. Here is a video of Remainers stating the same as Leavers: That is so badly edited even a six year old would realise that sentences are being taken out of context. The editing of the Cameron piece is particularly laughable. Only a fool wouldn't spot it. Pathetic.
Furthermore, here is Nigel Farage talking about the Norway option in its full context and how it's perfect for what Norway has independently chosen to do, but it's not something that Farage wants for the UK (first 1min 45 seconds) From 2 min 34 seconds, Nigel Farage declares that he does not want the UK to be a member of the single market This is what happens when the Remain side is exposed to facts they did not know existed. Inside their own bubble of propaganda, they've rechurned these canards about the single market without having done an iota of research beyond a silly YouTube collection of misquotes. You didn't listen to that. Otherwise you would have realised that Farage literally lied literally five seconds later. He told a blatant lie in the same sentence as he spoke about the SM. Pathetic. Here is Michael Gove talking about the need to "leave the Single Market". Here's a quote from that article: "On trading, he said the UK would be part of the European free trade zone with access to the European single market but "free from EU regulation which costs us billions of pounds a year". A blatant lie. Pathetic. Here is a video of Remainers stating the same as Leavers: That is so badly edited even a six year old would realise that sentences are being taken out of context. The editing of the Cameron piece is particularly laughable. Only a fool wouldn't spot it. Pathetic.
Furthermore, here is Nigel Farage talking about the Norway option in its full context and how it's perfect for what Norway has independently chosen to do, but it's not something that Farage wants for the UK (first 1min 45 seconds) From 2 min 34 seconds, Nigel Farage declares that he does not want the UK to be a member of the single market This is what happens when the Remain side is exposed to facts they did not know existed. Inside their own bubble of propaganda, they've rechurned these canards about the single market without having done an iota of research beyond a silly YouTube collection of misquotes.
Here is Michael Gove talking about the need to "leave the Single Market".
Here is a video of Remainers stating the same as Leavers:
Deleted User wrote: » During the campaign, all lead figures on both Leave and Remain sides stated that a vote to Leave was a vote to Leave the SM and CU. From Johnson to Farage to Gove, they are all consistent. No question about it. The video you refer to quotes Hannan a year before the referendum - and he is/was not a major player during that referendum campaign. The above 3 political figures I quoted were - and ALL leading Remain campaigners agreed and said a vote to Leave was a vote to Leave the SM and CU. These are the facts. You just need to accept them.
liamtech wrote: » These are the facts. You just need to accept them.
Kermit.de.frog wrote: » What makes you think I am anti EU? I respect democracy. They voted to leave. You are the one with the issue wanting to ignore the result.
Infini wrote: » They voted to leave without any idea of HOW to or WHAT that would entail even. Not only was the referendum an extremely knife edge result (51/49)... The truth is this whole thing reeks of corruption, ignorance and cancerous levels of stupidy in the end and anyone honestly supporting Brexit is foolish to say the very least if not outright stupid simply because there are no facts or benefits to support this unless its how much corrupt CONS can screw over people with this whole thing.
Deleted User wrote: » Then there's nothing I can do to convince you. If watching ALL leaders of the Remain campaign admit that a vote to Leave was a vote to Leave the SM/CU, and if the major players of the Leave campaign said, during the referendum, the same thing - then there's nothing more I can do to persuade you otherwise. As for Norway, I answered that above with my Farage video. That Boris Johnson video is from 2013, not during the 2016 referendum - again, more misinformation. For Daniel Hannan, I already said that ALL Remain leaders + ALL Leave leaders agreed to leave the CU/SM. Pointing to comments Daniel Hannan made, as if he turned the referendum on its head, and when he made those comments not during the referendum campaign is - again - misinformation.
weldoninhio wrote: » The U.K. voted to leave. They have been thwarted at every step by the EU. The EU know that if U.K. leaves and doesn’t disintegrate, other countries will be very quickly out the door after them.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Any thoughts on my reply to you? Here it is in case you missed it.
Deleted User wrote: » In summary, then: To prove lies, you must prove intentionality. Do you have any evidence of intentionality? Farage isn't a liar? Hahaha. Oh wait! Maybe you're right. Maybe he actually believed what he said. In which case he doesn't know what he's talking about. Okay, Farage is clueless. Agreed. Second, the video stands. All Remain leaders accepted that a vote to Leave was a vote to Leave the SM/CU. Can you provide evidence of a leading Remain campaigner who argued, during the referendum, that a vote to Leave was a vote to Remain in the SM/CU? The video stands nowhere but in a hall of shame. It's an amateurish attempt to misrepresent people with childish editing. The fact that you defend it when you now know it's a lie says quite a lot. Third, Mr. Gove did mention being part of a European free trade zone. Perhaps with a PM other than Mrs. May, this would have been possible. She intentionally chose a "close and special" partnership with the EU, which sidelined any prospect of that trade agreement. Look over there? No. You linked to an article as 'proof'. The article simply showed that Gove lied. Or was clueless. Or both. Your 'evidence' doesn't amount to a hill of beans. It's rubbish.
To prove lies, you must prove intentionality. Do you have any evidence of intentionality?
Second, the video stands. All Remain leaders accepted that a vote to Leave was a vote to Leave the SM/CU. Can you provide evidence of a leading Remain campaigner who argued, during the referendum, that a vote to Leave was a vote to Remain in the SM/CU?
Third, Mr. Gove did mention being part of a European free trade zone. Perhaps with a PM other than Mrs. May, this would have been possible. She intentionally chose a "close and special" partnership with the EU, which sidelined any prospect of that trade agreement.
[Deleted User] wrote: » It was 52 - 48. As for the rest, oh dear, oh dear... :rolleyes:
Then there's nothing I can do to convince you.
[Deleted User] wrote: » Then there's nothing I can do to convince you.
Infini wrote: » You have no interest in dealing in Facts when faced with them, you have no interest in the real concerns those that support remain here because your too afraid to admit your wrong and you are wrong because you have no facts or advantages to prove your views valid. You cannot convince anyone when you have no solid facts and link examples that have been debunked or proven invalid we have 11 threads on Brexit and the endless parade of failures, fùckups and ignorant stupidity of the British goverment making a balls over and over in the face of Solid hard facts and reality on the issue.
Deleted User wrote: » Do you believe that the position I, and many others, hold - namely, that the nation-state should be pregnant with sovereignty, and not distributed to a supranational bureaucracy, is a legitimate position to hold? I'm not referring to the UK here, but the principle in itself.
Deleted User wrote: » It was 52 - 48. As for the rest, oh dear, oh dear... :rolleyes:
[Deleted User] wrote: » I've done this extensively in my previous post. I am against the concept of pooled sovereignty. By definition, that must mean I'm in favour of a repratriation of that pooled sovereignty back to the nation-state. I believe in the model which argues that citizens should directly elect/remove legislators. Once you move up the EU ladder, those legislators become more distant. That's not the type of political direction I wish to see. This isn't an economic argument; it's an argument in favour of controlling the sovereignty hitherto pooled with the EU. It is economically neutral: as the decision could be economically advantageous or disadvantageous. Regardless of the economics, the sovereignty point stands.
Some argue that pooling sovereignty is a good thing, and they are entitled to that worldview. My perspective is clear - that power should, as much as possible, be controlled by the nation-state.
Infini wrote: » Seriously the UK is the one thwarting itself they had no idea HOW brexit or even a plan of how to proceed. The same ones saying they voted to leave say they should leave but ignore HOW to leave unless your plan is to cause the economy to inplode overnight with no concern or interest of the colateral damage that it could cause including fatalities, an economic crash or the Breakup of the UK itself. The EU was clear from the start on what it wanted and what it was offering the UK on the otherhand was a scitzophrenic mess politically as it has no idea of what it wanted a result of an ignorant minority party trying to force things through without agreement or consensus only Brinkmanship and animousity.
Deleted User wrote: » Do you believe that the position I, and many others, hold - namely, that the nation-state should be pregnant with sovereignty, and not distributed to a supranational bureaucracy, is a legitimate position to hold?
weldoninhio wrote: » Is the EU going to offer the U.K. a better deal in the future?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/df05300f57fe28ddd3330602c0adbfdb.svg)
