Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Freedom of movement has been the biggest reason for Brexit on the whole. Immigration has been the no 1 point for Brexit so if that was taken out of the equation the Brexit hardliners would only say Brexits all about trading instead." In the begining thats what it was all about, companies being able to trade more freely. But over time it has mutated into a lot more! very slowly and carefully. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Blair still hasn't got the message that he is despised by I would say a good majority of this country. He's got some brass neck even showing his face after Chilcott said the other week Blair deliberately mislead the public over Iraq. Such is the level of contempt for Blair as long as toxic Tony is cheerleading for the EU then he is doing a great job for the Brexit cause and suring up the Leave cause." Yet still vastly more popular than any party you've ever voted for!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Blair still hasn't got the message that he is despised by I would say a good majority of this country. He's got some brass neck even showing his face after Chilcott said the other week Blair deliberately mislead the public over Iraq. Such is the level of contempt for Blair as long as toxic Tony is cheerleading for the EU then he is doing a great job for the Brexit cause and suring up the Leave cause. Yet still vastly more popular than any party you've ever voted for! "Theresa May just got more votes than Blair did in 1997. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Freedom of movement has been the biggest reason for Brexit on the whole. Immigration has been the no 1 point for Brexit so if that was taken out of the equation the Brexit hardliners would only say Brexits all about trading instead. In the begining thats what it was all about, companies being able to trade more freely. But over time it has mutated into a lot more! very slowly and carefully." Incorrect, in the beginning it wad not all about companies being able to trade more freely. In the beginning (for the UK in 1972) it was about a customs union, free movement of people and ever closer union. It was only later (post 1986) that Britain negotiated opt outs from the 'ever closer union' and fought for the creation of the Single Market, which is all about companies being able to trade more easily and freely across Europe. The reality is is that all the things BREXITers say they don't like about the EU were there in the EEC back in 1972 and, if anything, are less important and stringent now than they were then. Where as, the things they say were there and they like (companies being able to trade freely) were not really there in 1972 but are now. Everyone knows that BREXITers lied about the £350 million, now they're lying about what the EEC was and the EU is. How much longer to you think you can keep lying to the British people before they find you out, It's only a matter of time. Maybe that's why BREXITers are in such a hurry to get this thing done, regardless of how shitty a deal we get, before people realise what total lies and bollocks they've been told by BREXIT. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Freedom of movement has been the biggest reason for Brexit on the whole. Immigration has been the no 1 point for Brexit so if that was taken out of the equation the Brexit hardliners would only say Brexits all about trading instead." Every brexiter on here says that it's got nothing to do with immigration though  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Really? I was led to believe that when we joined in 1973 it was then called the European Economic Community. So before you start emphasing the word Brexit in capitals (how juvenile) I would suggest the original poster was correct and youre not? and that it was all about being able to trade more freely. if it wasn't, why was the EEC always referred to as "The Common Market"??? Obviously youre a remainer, any one can see that. and lets be honest the remain campaign was totally above board and truthful wasn't it?? of course the leave campaign wasn't squeaky clean either, but then which political campaign ever is? I'll tell you another difference between now and 1972. Widnes had a decent rugby league team back then "EEC (common market) was precisely that when we joined in 1972. The "freedom of movement" thing only kicked in following Maastricht etc. But it WAS always the big plan of Germany (and to a lesser extent France) who wanted to have access to cheap labour. It was always in the pipeline to some extent. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I like tony, he wants the best for the country, remainers are the true patriots "Bollocks | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I like tony, he wants the best for the country, remainers are the true patriots ".. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no problem with free movement of EU citizens,it is the non EU citizens I have a problem with,it is up to us to decide which refugees we take etc. We need EU workers because of the lack of training in this country started by that half wit Blair" It's already up to us to decide which refugees we take! And how many non-EU immigrants we take! Those have always been 100% under British control. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tony Blair should keep his thoughts to himself I for one would love to see him stand for parliament again and fall flat on his face and lose his deposit. "Rather than see him stand for parliament I'd prefer to see him stand in the dock for war crimes at the Hague. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no problem with free movement of EU citizens,it is the non EU citizens I have a problem with,it is up to us to decide which refugees we take etc. We need EU workers because of the lack of training in this country started by that half wit Blair It's already up to us to decide which refugees we take! And how many non-EU immigrants we take! Those have always been 100% under British control. " Not necessarily true as we are seeing in the EU now it's looking more and more likely that because of the ever increasing migrant crisis in the Mediterranean Sea the EU policy is looking like it wants to force EU member states to take their proportional share of new migrants arriving. It's certainly what has been suggested by Juncker and Merkel. Thank fuck we are leaving if this turns out to be the case! Why doesn't Germany take them all it was the silly frau Merkel who said last year "all are welcome here" so let her have the lot of them! The level of intake of new arrivals in Germany has become toxic for Merkel now though so she is trying to palm them off onto other countries. Completely out of order and the migrant crisis shows no sign of stopping or slowing, it's all going to blow up in her stupid gormless expressionless face. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no problem with free movement of EU citizens,it is the non EU citizens I have a problem with,it is up to us to decide which refugees we take etc. We need EU workers because of the lack of training in this country started by that half wit Blair It's already up to us to decide which refugees we take! And how many non-EU immigrants we take! Those have always been 100% under British control. Not necessarily true as we are seeing in the EU now it's looking more and more likely that because of the ever increasing migrant crisis in the Mediterranean Sea the EU policy is looking like it wants to force EU member states to take their proportional share of new migrants arriving. It's certainly what has been suggested by Juncker and Merkel. Thank fuck we are leaving if this turns out to be the case! Why doesn't Germany take them all it was the silly frau Merkel who said last year "all are welcome here" so let her have the lot of them! The level of intake of new arrivals in Germany has become toxic for Merkel now though so she is trying to palm them off onto other countries. Completely out of order and the migrant crisis shows no sign of stopping or slowing, it's all going to blow up in her stupid gormless expressionless face. " If we were in the EU, we could veto it. Yet another fail their Centaur. The UK has always had 100% control over refugees and non eu mmigration | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no problem with free movement of EU citizens,it is the non EU citizens I have a problem with,it is up to us to decide which refugees we take etc. We need EU workers because of the lack of training in this country started by that half wit Blair It's already up to us to decide which refugees we take! And how many non-EU immigrants we take! Those have always been 100% under British control. Not necessarily true as we are seeing in the EU now it's looking more and more likely that because of the ever increasing migrant crisis in the Mediterranean Sea the EU policy is looking like it wants to force EU member states to take their proportional share of new migrants arriving. It's certainly what has been suggested by Juncker and Merkel. Thank fuck we are leaving if this turns out to be the case! Why doesn't Germany take them all it was the silly frau Merkel who said last year "all are welcome here" so let her have the lot of them! The level of intake of new arrivals in Germany has become toxic for Merkel now though so she is trying to palm them off onto other countries. Completely out of order and the migrant crisis shows no sign of stopping or slowing, it's all going to blow up in her stupid gormless expressionless face. If we were in the EU, we could veto it. Yet another fail their Centaur. The UK has always had 100% control over refugees and non eu mmigration " Now we are leaving the EU we can 100% opt out of it, do we have a veto on the free movement of people as an EU member....no we don't. As all these migrants arriving from Africa are given refugees status in the EU over the years they will get full EU member state citizenship then they would all have the full and automatic right to come to the UK as EU citizens under free movement rules. There is no veto against it, the only way to stop it is to leave the EU and thank heavens that is exactly what we are now doing. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no problem with free movement of EU citizens,it is the non EU citizens I have a problem with,it is up to us to decide which refugees we take etc. We need EU workers because of the lack of training in this country started by that half wit Blair It's already up to us to decide which refugees we take! And how many non-EU immigrants we take! Those have always been 100% under British control. Not necessarily true as we are seeing in the EU now it's looking more and more likely that because of the ever increasing migrant crisis in the Mediterranean Sea the EU policy is looking like it wants to force EU member states to take their proportional share of new migrants arriving. It's certainly what has been suggested by Juncker and Merkel. Thank fuck we are leaving if this turns out to be the case! Why doesn't Germany take them all it was the silly frau Merkel who said last year "all are welcome here" so let her have the lot of them! The level of intake of new arrivals in Germany has become toxic for Merkel now though so she is trying to palm them off onto other countries. Completely out of order and the migrant crisis shows no sign of stopping or slowing, it's all going to blow up in her stupid gormless expressionless face. If we were in the EU, we could veto it. Yet another fail their Centaur. The UK has always had 100% control over refugees and non eu mmigration Now we are leaving the EU we can 100% opt out of it, do we have a veto on the free movement of people as an EU member....no we don't. As all these migrants arriving from Africa are given refugees status in the EU over the years they will get full EU member state citizenship then they would all have the full and automatic right to come to the UK as EU citizens under free movement rules. There is no veto against it, the only way to stop it is to leave the EU and thank heavens that is exactly what we are now doing. " Once they have become citizens of another country, they are no longer refugees. The UK has 100% control over refugees coming here. Want to carry on failing there centaur or do you think you've made yourself look daft enough for one day? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no problem with free movement of EU citizens,it is the non EU citizens I have a problem with,it is up to us to decide which refugees we take etc. We need EU workers because of the lack of training in this country started by that half wit Blair It's already up to us to decide which refugees we take! And how many non-EU immigrants we take! Those have always been 100% under British control. Not necessarily true as we are seeing in the EU now it's looking more and more likely that because of the ever increasing migrant crisis in the Mediterranean Sea the EU policy is looking like it wants to force EU member states to take their proportional share of new migrants arriving. It's certainly what has been suggested by Juncker and Merkel. Thank fuck we are leaving if this turns out to be the case! Why doesn't Germany take them all it was the silly frau Merkel who said last year "all are welcome here" so let her have the lot of them! The level of intake of new arrivals in Germany has become toxic for Merkel now though so she is trying to palm them off onto other countries. Completely out of order and the migrant crisis shows no sign of stopping or slowing, it's all going to blow up in her stupid gormless expressionless face. If we were in the EU, we could veto it. Yet another fail their Centaur. The UK has always had 100% control over refugees and non eu mmigration Now we are leaving the EU we can 100% opt out of it, do we have a veto on the free movement of people as an EU member....no we don't. As all these migrants arriving from Africa are given refugees status in the EU over the years they will get full EU member state citizenship then they would all have the full and automatic right to come to the UK as EU citizens under free movement rules. There is no veto against it, the only way to stop it is to leave the EU and thank heavens that is exactly what we are now doing. Once they have become citizens of another country, they are no longer refugees. The UK has 100% control over refugees coming here. Want to carry on failing there centaur or do you think you've made yourself look daft enough for one day? " The only one making themselves look daft here is you, as you did on the steel thread when you had no clue about different grades of steel, I thought you would've got tired of digging holes for yourself by now but you seem to like it so I'm going to start calling you Doug. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no problem with free movement of EU citizens,it is the non EU citizens I have a problem with,it is up to us to decide which refugees we take etc. We need EU workers because of the lack of training in this country started by that half wit Blair It's already up to us to decide which refugees we take! And how many non-EU immigrants we take! Those have always been 100% under British control. Not necessarily true as we are seeing in the EU now it's looking more and more likely that because of the ever increasing migrant crisis in the Mediterranean Sea the EU policy is looking like it wants to force EU member states to take their proportional share of new migrants arriving. It's certainly what has been suggested by Juncker and Merkel. Thank fuck we are leaving if this turns out to be the case! Why doesn't Germany take them all it was the silly frau Merkel who said last year "all are welcome here" so let her have the lot of them! The level of intake of new arrivals in Germany has become toxic for Merkel now though so she is trying to palm them off onto other countries. Completely out of order and the migrant crisis shows no sign of stopping or slowing, it's all going to blow up in her stupid gormless expressionless face. If we were in the EU, we could veto it. Yet another fail their Centaur. The UK has always had 100% control over refugees and non eu mmigration Now we are leaving the EU we can 100% opt out of it, do we have a veto on the free movement of people as an EU member....no we don't. As all these migrants arriving from Africa are given refugees status in the EU over the years they will get full EU member state citizenship then they would all have the full and automatic right to come to the UK as EU citizens under free movement rules. There is no veto against it, the only way to stop it is to leave the EU and thank heavens that is exactly what we are now doing. " My god you don't half talk some crap A typical ukip never wrong talks crap arragaunt Big mouth I could go on for ever | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I would go with the OPs first option....he's lying." You know Tony Blair is lying when his lips move. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no problem with free movement of EU citizens,it is the non EU citizens I have a problem with,it is up to us to decide which refugees we take etc. We need EU workers because of the lack of training in this country started by that half wit Blair It's already up to us to decide which refugees we take! And how many non-EU immigrants we take! Those have always been 100% under British control. Not necessarily true as we are seeing in the EU now it's looking more and more likely that because of the ever increasing migrant crisis in the Mediterranean Sea the EU policy is looking like it wants to force EU member states to take their proportional share of new migrants arriving. It's certainly what has been suggested by Juncker and Merkel. Thank fuck we are leaving if this turns out to be the case! Why doesn't Germany take them all it was the silly frau Merkel who said last year "all are welcome here" so let her have the lot of them! The level of intake of new arrivals in Germany has become toxic for Merkel now though so she is trying to palm them off onto other countries. Completely out of order and the migrant crisis shows no sign of stopping or slowing, it's all going to blow up in her stupid gormless expressionless face. If we were in the EU, we could veto it. Yet another fail their Centaur. The UK has always had 100% control over refugees and non eu mmigration Now we are leaving the EU we can 100% opt out of it, do we have a veto on the free movement of people as an EU member....no we don't. As all these migrants arriving from Africa are given refugees status in the EU over the years they will get full EU member state citizenship then they would all have the full and automatic right to come to the UK as EU citizens under free movement rules. There is no veto against it, the only way to stop it is to leave the EU and thank heavens that is exactly what we are now doing. Once they have become citizens of another country, they are no longer refugees. The UK has 100% control over refugees coming here. Want to carry on failing there centaur or do you think you've made yourself look daft enough for one day? The only one making themselves look daft here is you, as you did on the steel thread when you had no clue about different grades of steel, I thought you would've got tired of digging holes for yourself by now but you seem to like it so I'm going to start calling you Doug. "Jumped to a completely different topic huh? Guess you had made youeself look daft enough. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Apparently Tony Blair has been speaking to EU leaders. He now says there is a "third way" a kind of "have your cake and eat it" as far as brexit or not is concerned. We would stay in the single market fully. Most parts of the customs union (unclear if that would just be the "good bits") but we would have "flexibility " on free movement. I see 3 possibilities: Too good to be true (he is lying)???? Absolutely Brilliant (he has got what Cameron asked for...which if conceded at the time would have given a VERY different referendum result)????? EU have bottled it(they really, really don't want us to leave so are talking BS when trying to play hardball)?????? Just a brief article on BBC news. Not got time to fully fact check details (sure the usual few can do this...Matt/Centaur/CCLC etc). But what are people's thoughts on this?" Just been watching sky news coverage on this story. Corbyn has said in response to Blair's comments that the EU referendum result must be respected and Brexit must happen. Shadow Labour chancellor John McDonnell also said politics has changed and Blair is hopelessly out of touch with the people. Some Corbyn supporters at a Corbyn rally were interviewed on sky news and they said New Labour (Blair's Labour) is dead and it is now Corbyn's Labour. They said Blair and his opinions are now irrelevant, basically he should just shut up and go away. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Apparently Tony Blair has been speaking to EU leaders. He now says there is a "third way" a kind of "have your cake and eat it" as far as brexit or not is concerned. We would stay in the single market fully. Most parts of the customs union (unclear if that would just be the "good bits") but we would have "flexibility " on free movement. I see 3 possibilities: Too good to be true (he is lying)???? Absolutely Brilliant (he has got what Cameron asked for...which if conceded at the time would have given a VERY different referendum result)????? EU have bottled it(they really, really don't want us to leave so are talking BS when trying to play hardball)?????? Just a brief article on BBC news. Not got time to fully fact check details (sure the usual few can do this...Matt/Centaur/CCLC etc). But what are people's thoughts on this? Just been watching sky news coverage on this story. Corbyn has said in response to Blair's comments that the EU referendum result must be respected and Brexit must happen. Shadow Labour chancellor John McDonnell also said politics has changed and Blair is hopelessly out of touch with the people. Some Corbyn supporters at a Corbyn rally were interviewed on sky news and they said New Labour (Blair's Labour) is dead and it is now Corbyn's Labour. They said Blair and his opinions are now irrelevant, basically he should just shut up and go away. " Blair is on the Sophie Ridge programme on sky news tomorrow where his comments in this story have come from. He also says in the interview a Corbyn government would leave Britain on its back. What do the Corbyn supporters on here think of that? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Apparently Tony Blair has been speaking to EU leaders. He now says there is a "third way" a kind of "have your cake and eat it" as far as brexit or not is concerned. We would stay in the single market fully. Most parts of the customs union (unclear if that would just be the "good bits") but we would have "flexibility " on free movement. I see 3 possibilities: Too good to be true (he is lying)???? Absolutely Brilliant (he has got what Cameron asked for...which if conceded at the time would have given a VERY different referendum result)????? EU have bottled it(they really, really don't want us to leave so are talking BS when trying to play hardball)?????? Just a brief article on BBC news. Not got time to fully fact check details (sure the usual few can do this...Matt/Centaur/CCLC etc). But what are people's thoughts on this? Just been watching sky news coverage on this story. Corbyn has said in response to Blair's comments that the EU referendum result must be respected and Brexit must happen. Shadow Labour chancellor John McDonnell also said politics has changed and Blair is hopelessly out of touch with the people. Some Corbyn supporters at a Corbyn rally were interviewed on sky news and they said New Labour (Blair's Labour) is dead and it is now Corbyn's Labour. They said Blair and his opinions are now irrelevant, basically he should just shut up and go away. Blair is on the Sophie Ridge programme on sky news tomorrow where his comments in this story have come from. He also says in the interview a Corbyn government would leave Britain on its back. What do the Corbyn supporters on here think of that? " If you had listened, that comment was made on the basis of leaving the EU/custom zone, something he's obviously against. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Apparently Tony Blair has been speaking to EU leaders. He now says there is a "third way" a kind of "have your cake and eat it" as far as brexit or not is concerned. We would stay in the single market fully. Most parts of the customs union (unclear if that would just be the "good bits") but we would have "flexibility " on free movement. I see 3 possibilities: Too good to be true (he is lying)???? Absolutely Brilliant (he has got what Cameron asked for...which if conceded at the time would have given a VERY different referendum result)????? EU have bottled it(they really, really don't want us to leave so are talking BS when trying to play hardball)?????? Just a brief article on BBC news. Not got time to fully fact check details (sure the usual few can do this...Matt/Centaur/CCLC etc). But what are people's thoughts on this? Just been watching sky news coverage on this story. Corbyn has said in response to Blair's comments that the EU referendum result must be respected and Brexit must happen. Shadow Labour chancellor John McDonnell also said politics has changed and Blair is hopelessly out of touch with the people. Some Corbyn supporters at a Corbyn rally were interviewed on sky news and they said New Labour (Blair's Labour) is dead and it is now Corbyn's Labour. They said Blair and his opinions are now irrelevant, basically he should just shut up and go away. Blair is on the Sophie Ridge programme on sky news tomorrow where his comments in this story have come from. He also says in the interview a Corbyn government would leave Britain on its back. What do the Corbyn supporters on here think of that? " Not a labour voter but i like corbyn .Tony blair was always was a tory tribute act for me.He's yesterday's man. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Apparently Tony Blair has been speaking to EU leaders. He now says there is a "third way" a kind of "have your cake and eat it" as far as brexit or not is concerned. We would stay in the single market fully. Most parts of the customs union (unclear if that would just be the "good bits") but we would have "flexibility " on free movement. I see 3 possibilities: Too good to be true (he is lying)???? Absolutely Brilliant (he has got what Cameron asked for...which if conceded at the time would have given a VERY different referendum result)????? EU have bottled it(they really, really don't want us to leave so are talking BS when trying to play hardball)?????? Just a brief article on BBC news. Not got time to fully fact check details (sure the usual few can do this...Matt/Centaur/CCLC etc). But what are people's thoughts on this? Just been watching sky news coverage on this story. Corbyn has said in response to Blair's comments that the EU referendum result must be respected and Brexit must happen. Shadow Labour chancellor John McDonnell also said politics has changed and Blair is hopelessly out of touch with the people. Some Corbyn supporters at a Corbyn rally were interviewed on sky news and they said New Labour (Blair's Labour) is dead and it is now Corbyn's Labour. They said Blair and his opinions are now irrelevant, basically he should just shut up and go away. Blair is on the Sophie Ridge programme on sky news tomorrow where his comments in this story have come from. He also says in the interview a Corbyn government would leave Britain on its back. What do the Corbyn supporters on here think of that? " Centaur, why can't you even be truthful about where Blair made these comments? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40615119 It clearly says Radio 4 Today behind him. Why are you lying and telling people he said it on the Sophie Ridge programme? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Apparently Tony Blair has been speaking to EU leaders. He now says there is a "third way" a kind of "have your cake and eat it" as far as brexit or not is concerned. We would stay in the single market fully. Most parts of the customs union (unclear if that would just be the "good bits") but we would have "flexibility " on free movement. I see 3 possibilities: Too good to be true (he is lying)???? Absolutely Brilliant (he has got what Cameron asked for...which if conceded at the time would have given a VERY different referendum result)????? EU have bottled it(they really, really don't want us to leave so are talking BS when trying to play hardball)?????? Just a brief article on BBC news. Not got time to fully fact check details (sure the usual few can do this...Matt/Centaur/CCLC etc). But what are people's thoughts on this? Just been watching sky news coverage on this story. Corbyn has said in response to Blair's comments that the EU referendum result must be respected and Brexit must happen. Shadow Labour chancellor John McDonnell also said politics has changed and Blair is hopelessly out of touch with the people. Some Corbyn supporters at a Corbyn rally were interviewed on sky news and they said New Labour (Blair's Labour) is dead and it is now Corbyn's Labour. They said Blair and his opinions are now irrelevant, basically he should just shut up and go away. Blair is on the Sophie Ridge programme on sky news tomorrow where his comments in this story have come from. He also says in the interview a Corbyn government would leave Britain on its back. What do the Corbyn supporters on here think of that? Centaur, why can't you even be truthful about where Blair made these comments? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40615119 It clearly says Radio 4 Today behind him. Why are you lying and telling people he said it on the Sophie Ridge programme? " Because sky news reported on it and showed a preview of the interview with Sophie Ridge on sky news. The full interview is on the Sophie Ridge programme in the morning. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Apparently Tony Blair has been speaking to EU leaders. He now says there is a "third way" a kind of "have your cake and eat it" as far as brexit or not is concerned. We would stay in the single market fully. Most parts of the customs union (unclear if that would just be the "good bits") but we would have "flexibility " on free movement. I see 3 possibilities: Too good to be true (he is lying)???? Absolutely Brilliant (he has got what Cameron asked for...which if conceded at the time would have given a VERY different referendum result)????? EU have bottled it(they really, really don't want us to leave so are talking BS when trying to play hardball)?????? Just a brief article on BBC news. Not got time to fully fact check details (sure the usual few can do this...Matt/Centaur/CCLC etc). But what are people's thoughts on this? Just been watching sky news coverage on this story. Corbyn has said in response to Blair's comments that the EU referendum result must be respected and Brexit must happen. Shadow Labour chancellor John McDonnell also said politics has changed and Blair is hopelessly out of touch with the people. Some Corbyn supporters at a Corbyn rally were interviewed on sky news and they said New Labour (Blair's Labour) is dead and it is now Corbyn's Labour. They said Blair and his opinions are now irrelevant, basically he should just shut up and go away. Blair is on the Sophie Ridge programme on sky news tomorrow where his comments in this story have come from. He also says in the interview a Corbyn government would leave Britain on its back. What do the Corbyn supporters on here think of that? Centaur, why can't you even be truthful about where Blair made these comments? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40615119 It clearly says Radio 4 Today behind him. Why are you lying and telling people he said it on the Sophie Ridge programme? Because sky news reported on it and showed a preview of the interview with Sophie Ridge on sky news. The full interview is on the Sophie Ridge programme in the morning. " But the comments didn't come from there as you have claimed, read the OP "Just a brief article on BBC news." And watch the video of the Live interview he gave on the today programme on BBC radio 4 that I have already posted the link to. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Who cares what news outlet got the story first? He'd have been told by his neoliberal paymasters to get the story out to as many of them as possible. Like an obedient lapdog he is doing just that. " Are you suggesting hat Anthony Lynton Blair 666 is a whore? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Who cares what news outlet got the story first? He'd have been told by his neoliberal paymasters to get the story out to as many of them as possible. Like an obedient lapdog he is doing just that. Are you suggesting hat Anthony Lynton Blair 666 is a whore?" Well he kissed Murdoch's ring | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"is there anyone more hated than Tony Blair? why would anyone listen to him after the history behind him" ...Some people love kissing the Devils arse. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Who cares what news outlet got the story first? He'd have been told by his neoliberal paymasters to get the story out to as many of them as possible. Like an obedient lapdog he is doing just that. Are you suggesting hat Anthony Lynton Blair 666 is a whore? Well he kissed Murdoch's ring" Thought it was Murdoch's wife's. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"is there anyone more hated than Tony Blair? why would anyone listen to him after the history behind him" I know, Right... I mean he was only the most popular post WW2 Prime Minister that this country ever had. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"is there anyone more hated than Tony Blair? why would anyone listen to him after the history behind him I know, Right... I mean he was only the most popular post WW2 Prime Minister that this country ever had. " So Blair thinks its a bad idea, Major thinks its a bad idea, Brown thinks its a bad idea, Cameron thinks its a bad idea, Sturgeon thinks its a bad idea, and Clegg thinks Brexit is a bad idea. Chances are nearly all of us voted for parties when they were leaders. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Really? I was led to believe that when we joined in 1973 it was then called the European Economic Community. So before you start emphasing the word Brexit in capitals (how juvenile) I would suggest the original poster was correct and youre not? and that it was all about being able to trade more freely. if it wasn't, why was the EEC always referred to as "The Common Market"??? Obviously youre a remainer, any one can see that. and lets be honest the remain campaign was totally above board and truthful wasn't it?? of course the leave campaign wasn't squeaky clean either, but then which political campaign ever is? I'll tell you another difference between now and 1972. Widnes had a decent rugby league team back then "The European Economic Community (more often known as the "European Communities" in the rest of Europe - but not to be confused the European Community which came later) Was set up by the Treaties of Rome (1957). The bases of those treaties were the decisions made at the Messina Conference in June 1955 on the creation of a customs union. That's 18 years before the UK joined and 20 years before the 1975 referendum. The customs union is what became known as the Common Market and its aims were:- 1) The elimination of customs duties between Member States; 2) The establishment of an external Common Customs Tariff; 3) The introduction of common policies for agriculture and transport; 4) The creation of a European Social Fund; 5) The establishment of a European Investment Bank; 6) The development of closer relations between the Member States. 7) Regulatory Compliance by law To achieve these objectives the European Communities Treaty laid down guiding principles and set the framework for the legislative activities of the Community institutions. These involved common policies: the common agricultural policy (Articles 38 to 43), transport policy (Articles 74 and 75) and a common commercial policy (Articles 110 to 113). The Common Market was always intended to guarantee the free movement of goods and the mobility of factors of production (the free movement of people and enterprises, the freedom to provide services and the free movement of capital). It's simply an out and out lie, just like the £350 million, to try to claim that free movement of people and a common system of law to enforce the Common Market were not know about in 1972 or 1975. It's also untrue to claim that any of these have been fundamentally changed by the later treaties that changed the European Communities into the European Community and later the European Union. The original rights were simply taken across on mass. The only significant changes in rights by the later treaties were in the area of trade where the Common Market (customs union) was augmented by the creation of the Single Market. As for your comments on how I choose to write BREXIT; I really don't care even a tiny bit what your thoughts are on that and, if you really had anything useful or truthful to say on this subject, neither would you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Really? I was led to believe that when we joined in 1973 it was then called the European Economic Community. So before you start emphasing the word Brexit in capitals (how juvenile) I would suggest the original poster was correct and youre not? and that it was all about being able to trade more freely. if it wasn't, why was the EEC always referred to as "The Common Market"??? Obviously youre a remainer, any one can see that. and lets be honest the remain campaign was totally above board and truthful wasn't it?? of course the leave campaign wasn't squeaky clean either, but then which political campaign ever is? I'll tell you another difference between now and 1972. Widnes had a decent rugby league team back then
EEC (common market) was precisely that when we joined in 1972. The "freedom of movement" thing only kicked in following Maastricht etc. But it WAS always the big plan of Germany (and to a lesser extent France) who wanted to have access to cheap labour. It was always in the pipeline to some extent."Not true. As said above all 4 'freedoms of movement' were there in the original Treaty Of Rome which created the EEC back in 1957. Have you not ever watched 'Auf Wiedersehen, pet'? Millions of British workers used the already existing right to free movement to go and work all over the EEC/EC in the late 70s and 80s. How could they have done that if the right didn't exist until Maastricht in 1992? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no problem with free movement of EU citizens,it is the non EU citizens I have a problem with,it is up to us to decide which refugees we take etc. We need EU workers because of the lack of training in this country started by that half wit Blair It's already up to us to decide which refugees we take! And how many non-EU immigrants we take! Those have always been 100% under British control. Not necessarily true as we are seeing in the EU now it's looking more and more likely that because of the ever increasing migrant crisis in the Mediterranean Sea the EU policy is looking like it wants to force EU member states to take their proportional share of new migrants arriving. It's certainly what has been suggested by Juncker and Merkel. Thank fuck we are leaving if this turns out to be the case! Why doesn't Germany take them all it was the silly frau Merkel who said last year "all are welcome here" so let her have the lot of them! The level of intake of new arrivals in Germany has become toxic for Merkel now though so she is trying to palm them off onto other countries. Completely out of order and the migrant crisis shows no sign of stopping or slowing, it's all going to blow up in her stupid gormless expressionless face. " The countries which may be forced to take some refugees are the once that agreed to be part of that arrangement, the UK never did. If we had we would still be bound by that agreement if we left. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no problem with free movement of EU citizens,it is the non EU citizens I have a problem with,it is up to us to decide which refugees we take etc. We need EU workers because of the lack of training in this country started by that half wit Blair It's already up to us to decide which refugees we take! And how many non-EU immigrants we take! Those have always been 100% under British control. Not necessarily true as we are seeing in the EU now it's looking more and more likely that because of the ever increasing migrant crisis in the Mediterranean Sea the EU policy is looking like it wants to force EU member states to take their proportional share of new migrants arriving. It's certainly what has been suggested by Juncker and Merkel. Thank fuck we are leaving if this turns out to be the case! Why doesn't Germany take them all it was the silly frau Merkel who said last year "all are welcome here" so let her have the lot of them! The level of intake of new arrivals in Germany has become toxic for Merkel now though so she is trying to palm them off onto other countries. Completely out of order and the migrant crisis shows no sign of stopping or slowing, it's all going to blow up in her stupid gormless expressionless face. The countries which may be forced to take some refugees are the once that agreed to be part of that arrangement, the UK never did. If we had we would still be bound by that agreement if we left. " You're talking past tense and I'm talking future. I'm talking about the ongoing and ever increasing migrant crisis that is still happening now and shows no sign of stopping. The EU is looking at forcing EU member states to take a proportional percentage of migrants to each country in the EU. We can avoid it by leaving the EU and we can also avoid them coming here in future when they gain EU citizenship they will have the full and automatic right to travel anywhere in the EU under free movement of people rules. By leaving the EU and the single market free movement of people from the EU is going to end in the UK. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Really? I was led to believe that when we joined in 1973 it was then called the European Economic Community. So before you start emphasing the word Brexit in capitals (how juvenile) I would suggest the original poster was correct and youre not? and that it was all about being able to trade more freely. if it wasn't, why was the EEC always referred to as "The Common Market"??? Obviously youre a remainer, any one can see that. and lets be honest the remain campaign was totally above board and truthful wasn't it?? of course the leave campaign wasn't squeaky clean either, but then which political campaign ever is? I'll tell you another difference between now and 1972. Widnes had a decent rugby league team back then
EEC (common market) was precisely that when we joined in 1972. The "freedom of movement" thing only kicked in following Maastricht etc. But it WAS always the big plan of Germany (and to a lesser extent France) who wanted to have access to cheap labour. It was always in the pipeline to some extent.
Not true. As said above all 4 'freedoms of movement' were there in the original Treaty Of Rome which created the EEC back in 1957.
Have you not ever watched 'Auf Wiedersehen, pet'? Millions of British workers used the already existing right to free movement to go and work all over the EEC/EC in the late 70s and 80s. How could they have done that if the right didn't exist until Maastricht in 1992?"And how many countries were part of the original set up of the EU? It wasn't 28 as it is now. The EU is always looking to add more countries, who are invariably very poor countries and this then only leads to increasing volumes of movement of people, emigration and immigration in the EU. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And brexiters claim the vote was nothing to do with immigration "Immigration was one aspect of Brexit yes, along with many other reasons for leaving. It just so happens the debate on this thread has developed mainly onto immigration. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And brexiters claim the vote was nothing to do with immigration
Immigration was one aspect of Brexit yes, along with many other reasons for leaving. It just so happens the debate on this thread has developed mainly onto immigration. "So what do you have against refugees anyway, and people who used to be refugees? They have had a harder life than you could ever imagine. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And brexiters claim the vote was nothing to do with immigration
Immigration was one aspect of Brexit yes, along with many other reasons for leaving. It just so happens the debate on this thread has developed mainly onto immigration.
So what do you have against refugees anyway, and people who used to be refugees? They have had a harder life than you could ever imagine. "Even the EU is saying now the vast majority of those coming over on boats from Africa are not refugees, they are classed as economic migrants. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And brexiters claim the vote was nothing to do with immigration
Immigration was one aspect of Brexit yes, along with many other reasons for leaving. It just so happens the debate on this thread has developed mainly onto immigration.
So what do you have against refugees anyway, and people who used to be refugees? They have had a harder life than you could ever imagine. "Please don't confuse "immigrants" with "refugees". There are things called dictionaries if you want to check. However I did not start this thread about either of those things...it just seems to have been hijacked by the usual crew who just like to have a "pop" at each other with blinkered, unchanging views from BOTH sides. Any chance people could refer back to the OP? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no problem with free movement of EU citizens,it is the non EU citizens I have a problem with,it is up to us to decide which refugees we take etc. We need EU workers because of the lack of training in this country started by that half wit Blair It's already up to us to decide which refugees we take! And how many non-EU immigrants we take! Those have always been 100% under British control. Not necessarily true as we are seeing in the EU now it's looking more and more likely that because of the ever increasing migrant crisis in the Mediterranean Sea the EU policy is looking like it wants to force EU member states to take their proportional share of new migrants arriving. It's certainly what has been suggested by Juncker and Merkel. Thank fuck we are leaving if this turns out to be the case! Why doesn't Germany take them all it was the silly frau Merkel who said last year "all are welcome here" so let her have the lot of them! The level of intake of new arrivals in Germany has become toxic for Merkel now though so she is trying to palm them off onto other countries. Completely out of order and the migrant crisis shows no sign of stopping or slowing, it's all going to blow up in her stupid gormless expressionless face. The countries which may be forced to take some refugees are the once that agreed to be part of that arrangement, the UK never did. If we had we would still be bound by that agreement if we left. You're talking past tense and I'm talking future. I'm talking about the ongoing and ever increasing migrant crisis that is still happening now and shows no sign of stopping. The EU is looking at forcing EU member states to take a proportional percentage of migrants to each country in the EU. We can avoid it by leaving the EU and we can also avoid them coming here in future when they gain EU citizenship they will have the full and automatic right to travel anywhere in the EU under free movement of people rules. By leaving the EU and the single market free movement of people from the EU is going to end in the UK." The EU is insisting that member states take the proportion of refugees they agreed to take, no more or no less. Rightly or wrongly the UK choose not to be a part of thar agreement so the UK would not be forced to take any refugees at all. But, apart from withdrawing all UK aid from the origin countries which could only possibly make the migrant crisis worse, what exactly is your (or UKIP's) policy to actually try and solve the crisis. Seems to me it's pretty much do nothing and just hope they'll nether get here. Bit like the whole BREXIT strategy for leaving - Talk tough, do nothing and just have faith everything will workout just fine, because, after all, we are British. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And brexiters claim the vote was nothing to do with immigration
Immigration was one aspect of Brexit yes, along with many other reasons for leaving. It just so happens the debate on this thread has developed mainly onto immigration.
So what do you have against refugees anyway, and people who used to be refugees? They have had a harder life than you could ever imagine.
Please don't confuse "immigrants" with "refugees". There are things called dictionaries if you want to check.
However I did not start this thread about either of those things...it just seems to have been hijacked by the usual crew who just like to have a "pop" at each other with blinkered, unchanging views from BOTH sides.
Any chance people could refer back to the OP?"Whether they are refugees or economic migrants, whilst relevant, is a distinction that does nothing to actually solve the crisis. The reality is is that this crisis will only be sorted by taking action in the countries of origin. That means spending money there, in the countries of origin, to make them more desirable for people to want to stay in and make their lives there. It's rather ironic really that those who shout the most about this refugee/migrant crisis (UKIPers and BREXITers) are also the very same people who want to actually cut the aid money to the very countries of origin that most actually come from. It's almost like they have absolutely no concept of course and effect. With regard to Tony Blair:- I'm not a great fan, I definitely don't agree with everything he did but I do, and have, often found myself agreeing with what he says. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And brexiters claim the vote was nothing to do with immigration
Immigration was one aspect of Brexit yes, along with many other reasons for leaving. It just so happens the debate on this thread has developed mainly onto immigration.
So what do you have against refugees anyway, and people who used to be refugees? They have had a harder life than you could ever imagine.
Even the EU is saying now the vast majority of those coming over on boats from Africa are not refugees, they are classed as economic migrants. "The person I was quoting was specific about refugees, you are the one who then started talking about the so called migrant crisis. You said that the EU was going to dictate how many refugees the UK was going to take. You were then concerned that even if these refugees didn't come to the UK, they would be refugees in other EU countries, and then after gaining citizenship in that EU country could come and work in the UK. So it's obvious that you have some kind of problem with them and I wondered what it was. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And brexiters claim the vote was nothing to do with immigration
Immigration was one aspect of Brexit yes, along with many other reasons for leaving. It just so happens the debate on this thread has developed mainly onto immigration.
So what do you have against refugees anyway, and people who used to be refugees? They have had a harder life than you could ever imagine.
Even the EU is saying now the vast majority of those coming over on boats from Africa are not refugees, they are classed as economic migrants.
The person I was quoting was specific about refugees, you are the one who then started talking about the so called migrant crisis. You said that the EU was going to dictate how many refugees the UK was going to take. You were then concerned that even if these refugees didn't come to the UK, they would be refugees in other EU countries, and then after gaining citizenship in that EU country could come and work in the UK. So it's obvious that you have some kind of problem with them and I wondered what it was."It is Centaur! You aren't seriously really expecting a consistent, sequitur or logical argument from him, are you? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no problem with free movement of EU citizens,it is the non EU citizens I have a problem with,it is up to us to decide which refugees we take etc. We need EU workers because of the lack of training in this country started by that half wit Blair It's already up to us to decide which refugees we take! And how many non-EU immigrants we take! Those have always been 100% under British control. Not necessarily true as we are seeing in the EU now it's looking more and more likely that because of the ever increasing migrant crisis in the Mediterranean Sea the EU policy is looking like it wants to force EU member states to take their proportional share of new migrants arriving. It's certainly what has been suggested by Juncker and Merkel. Thank fuck we are leaving if this turns out to be the case! Why doesn't Germany take them all it was the silly frau Merkel who said last year "all are welcome here" so let her have the lot of them! The level of intake of new arrivals in Germany has become toxic for Merkel now though so she is trying to palm them off onto other countries. Completely out of order and the migrant crisis shows no sign of stopping or slowing, it's all going to blow up in her stupid gormless expressionless face. The countries which may be forced to take some refugees are the once that agreed to be part of that arrangement, the UK never did. If we had we would still be bound by that agreement if we left. You're talking past tense and I'm talking future. I'm talking about the ongoing and ever increasing migrant crisis that is still happening now and shows no sign of stopping. The EU is looking at forcing EU member states to take a proportional percentage of migrants to each country in the EU. We can avoid it by leaving the EU and we can also avoid them coming here in future when they gain EU citizenship they will have the full and automatic right to travel anywhere in the EU under free movement of people rules. By leaving the EU and the single market free movement of people from the EU is going to end in the UK. The EU is insisting that member states take the proportion of refugees they agreed to take, no more or no less. Rightly or wrongly the UK choose not to be a part of thar agreement so the UK would not be forced to take any refugees at all. But, apart from withdrawing all UK aid from the origin countries which could only possibly make the migrant crisis worse, what exactly is your (or UKIP's) policy to actually try and solve the crisis. Seems to me it's pretty much do nothing and just hope they'll nether get here. Bit like the whole BREXIT strategy for leaving - Talk tough, do nothing and just have faith everything will workout just fine, because, after all, we are British." No I wouldn't just do nothing and hope for the best but it seems that is exactly what the incompetent EU is doing and has been doing nothing about this for over a year now. The EU really should be taking a tougher line and should be setting up a blockade or flotilla of ships in the Mediterranean Sea to stop the people smuggler boats crossing in the first place. The EU really should be taking a leaf out of Australia's books and turn the boats around and send them back. The more that Europe takes these people then the more that will keep coming and that is exactly what has been and is now happening. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no problem with free movement of EU citizens,it is the non EU citizens I have a problem with,it is up to us to decide which refugees we take etc. We need EU workers because of the lack of training in this country started by that half wit Blair It's already up to us to decide which refugees we take! And how many non-EU immigrants we take! Those have always been 100% under British control. Not necessarily true as we are seeing in the EU now it's looking more and more likely that because of the ever increasing migrant crisis in the Mediterranean Sea the EU policy is looking like it wants to force EU member states to take their proportional share of new migrants arriving. It's certainly what has been suggested by Juncker and Merkel. Thank fuck we are leaving if this turns out to be the case! Why doesn't Germany take them all it was the silly frau Merkel who said last year "all are welcome here" so let her have the lot of them! The level of intake of new arrivals in Germany has become toxic for Merkel now though so she is trying to palm them off onto other countries. Completely out of order and the migrant crisis shows no sign of stopping or slowing, it's all going to blow up in her stupid gormless expressionless face. The countries which may be forced to take some refugees are the once that agreed to be part of that arrangement, the UK never did. If we had we would still be bound by that agreement if we left. You're talking past tense and I'm talking future. I'm talking about the ongoing and ever increasing migrant crisis that is still happening now and shows no sign of stopping. The EU is looking at forcing EU member states to take a proportional percentage of migrants to each country in the EU. We can avoid it by leaving the EU and we can also avoid them coming here in future when they gain EU citizenship they will have the full and automatic right to travel anywhere in the EU under free movement of people rules. By leaving the EU and the single market free movement of people from the EU is going to end in the UK. The EU is insisting that member states take the proportion of refugees they agreed to take, no more or no less. Rightly or wrongly the UK choose not to be a part of thar agreement so the UK would not be forced to take any refugees at all. But, apart from withdrawing all UK aid from the origin countries which could only possibly make the migrant crisis worse, what exactly is your (or UKIP's) policy to actually try and solve the crisis. Seems to me it's pretty much do nothing and just hope they'll nether get here. Bit like the whole BREXIT strategy for leaving - Talk tough, do nothing and just have faith everything will workout just fine, because, after all, we are British. No I wouldn't just do nothing and hope for the best but it seems that is exactly what the incompetent EU is doing and has been doing nothing about this for over a year now. The EU really should be taking a tougher line and should be setting up a blockade or flotilla of ships in the Mediterranean Sea to stop the people smuggler boats crossing in the first place. The EU really should be taking a leaf out of Australia's books and turn the boats around and send them back. The more that Europe takes these people then the more that will keep coming and that is exactly what has been and is now happening." Like I said, talking tough but actually doing nothing. How exactly do you 'turn a boat around and send it back' and where do you send it back to? How do you stop it from just turning around again after you've gone to turn another boat around? Even if the boat does get 'back' to wherever 'back' is how do you stop it heading our again the next day, or even minute? And what do you do if the boat is not seaworthy enough to make the trip back? Just sit back and watch the people drown? Sorry Centaur, this really is just talking tough but doing nothing that will actually help. Try giving an answer that actually gives a workable solution rather than a tough sounding, populist rant that doesn't actualy say anything. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And brexiters claim the vote was nothing to do with immigration
Immigration was one aspect of Brexit yes, along with many other reasons for leaving. It just so happens the debate on this thread has developed mainly onto immigration.
So what do you have against refugees anyway, and people who used to be refugees? They have had a harder life than you could ever imagine.
Even the EU is saying now the vast majority of those coming over on boats from Africa are not refugees, they are classed as economic migrants.
The person I was quoting was specific about refugees, you are the one who then started talking about the so called migrant crisis. You said that the EU was going to dictate how many refugees the UK was going to take. You were then concerned that even if these refugees didn't come to the UK, they would be refugees in other EU countries, and then after gaining citizenship in that EU country could come and work in the UK. So it's obvious that you have some kind of problem with them and I wondered what it was.
It is Centaur! You aren't seriously really expecting a consistent, sequitur or logical argument from him, are you?"No, you are right. I guess he is too embarrassed by his mix up of refugees and migrants to even reply. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Now the more interesting point is what if tony is right? Seems at odds from what we have heard.
And free movement became a issue when poorer nations joined.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People are prepared to gamble, what's not often heard is many fail to make it to the coast to get a boat, they die In the desert
Now the more interesting point is what if tony is right? Seems at odds from what we have heard.
And free movement became a issue when poorer nations joined.."Well existing member states did have powers to limit immigration from new member states. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tony Blair should keep his thoughts to himself I for one would love to see him stand for parliament again and fall flat on his face and lose his deposit.
Rather than see him stand for parliament I'd prefer to see him stand in the dock for war crimes at the Hague. "Even though he didn't commit any War crimes  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it me? Or can I detect some sexual tension between centaur and CLCC?! " I think you can detect tension between centaur and just about everyone with more than one brain cell | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it me? Or can I detect some sexual tension between centaur and CLCC?! " Not from my side! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it me? Or can I detect some sexual tension between centaur and CLCC?! Not from my side! " Wouldn't it be wonderful if two people, who are poles apart on the political spectrum, could be brought together, through the power of FAB? The heat of the forum translating into heat in the bedroom. Proving to all naysayers, that we are truly a United Kingdom... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it me? Or can I detect some sexual tension between centaur and CLCC?! Not from my side! Wouldn't it be wonderful if two people, who are poles apart on the political spectrum, could be brought together, through the power of FAB? The heat of the forum translating into heat in the bedroom. Proving to all naysayers, that we are truly a United Kingdom..." Nope. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tony Blair should keep his thoughts to himself I for one would love to see him stand for parliament again and fall flat on his face and lose his deposit.
Rather than see him stand for parliament I'd prefer to see him stand in the dock for war crimes at the Hague.
Even though he didn't commit any War crimes "As the useful idiot who knowingly provided the psychopathic cabal of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Pearl with the fabricated dodgy dossier and sent our troops into a politically unwinnable war armed with vulnerable vehicles and no body armour, waging war without due cause, replacing(admittedly tyrannical) stability with chaos and destruction on an apocalyptic scale, including creating the perfect scenario for daish to emerge and thrive..... how many counts do you want? He may be an unconvicted war criminal, but by any reasonable interpretation of the term, war criminal he most certainly is. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tony Blair should keep his thoughts to himself I for one would love to see him stand for parliament again and fall flat on his face and lose his deposit.
Rather than see him stand for parliament I'd prefer to see him stand in the dock for war crimes at the Hague.
Even though he didn't commit any War crimes
As the useful idiot who knowingly provided the psychopathic cabal of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Pearl with the fabricated dodgy dossier and sent our troops into a politically unwinnable war armed with vulnerable vehicles and no body armour, waging war without due cause, replacing(admittedly tyrannical) stability with chaos and destruction on an apocalyptic scale, including creating the perfect scenario for daish to emerge and thrive..... how many counts do you want?
He may be an unconvicted war criminal, but by any reasonable interpretation of the term, war criminal he most certainly is."But he's not though | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tony Blair should keep his thoughts to himself I for one would love to see him stand for parliament again and fall flat on his face and lose his deposit.
Rather than see him stand for parliament I'd prefer to see him stand in the dock for war crimes at the Hague.
Even though he didn't commit any War crimes
As the useful idiot who knowingly provided the psychopathic cabal of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Pearl with the fabricated dodgy dossier and sent our troops into a politically unwinnable war armed with vulnerable vehicles and no body armour, waging war without due cause, replacing(admittedly tyrannical) stability with chaos and destruction on an apocalyptic scale, including creating the perfect scenario for daish to emerge and thrive..... how many counts do you want?
He may be an unconvicted war criminal, but by any reasonable interpretation of the term, war criminal he most certainly is.
But he's not though "Not convicted, correct. Nevertheless, a war criminal saved from accountability on the basis that might is right and the victor is hardly ever forced to face justice. By any gauge of morality, Blair belongs behind bars. He is a vile apology for a human being. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tony Blair should keep his thoughts to himself I for one would love to see him stand for parliament again and fall flat on his face and lose his deposit.
Rather than see him stand for parliament I'd prefer to see him stand in the dock for war crimes at the Hague.
Even though he didn't commit any War crimes
As the useful idiot who knowingly provided the psychopathic cabal of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Pearl with the fabricated dodgy dossier and sent our troops into a politically unwinnable war armed with vulnerable vehicles and no body armour, waging war without due cause, replacing(admittedly tyrannical) stability with chaos and destruction on an apocalyptic scale, including creating the perfect scenario for daish to emerge and thrive..... how many counts do you want?
He may be an unconvicted war criminal, but by any reasonable interpretation of the term, war criminal he most certainly is.
But he's not though
Not convicted, correct.
Nevertheless, a war criminal saved from accountability on the basis that might is right and the victor is hardly ever forced to face justice.
By any gauge of morality, Blair belongs behind bars. He is a vile apology for a human being."You really need to look up what constitutes a war crime, then look up what Blair did and at what year he did it and you will find he committed NO WAR CRIMES, probably much to your annoyance | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
