BREXIT, Who Is Laughing Now?

Jackoftrades said:
Im not going down that road of hatred by you. you havent lowered yourself to insulting me, i treat people as they treat me. You may have noticed who accused who of hatred and used the word, idiot, however...

I dont see the problem quite the same as you though. But i do think that you present a better argument.

First and foremost illegal immigration is wrong, and its a problem. In my opinion, the biggest problem of immigration.

Now, lets assume you are France, and you have a big problem of a lot of people that want to get to Britain. And we are not in europe ( the future), are you going to spend time, money and other resources on stopping (helping to stop) them getting here? or are you going to turn a blind eye, or at worst, assist them?

Or do you think our borders will be safer because we (alone) will be manning them. Just remind yourself how many immigration officials and staff numbers have been cut, not increased!

Now onto european immigrants. The issue is the type of jobs, and the reward of such, (cost of living, not specifically an amount). People such as weatherspoon boss who say he cant afford to pay the living wage, want this low levelof reward. so there will always be a demand of people looking for this low levelmof pay compared to their own original country. The cure is difficult, but it needs better workers rights, and better reward, than those that the far right want. Yes, really.
Click to expand...
What's so bad about, France, that they will risk mutilation and death beneath the wheels of an articulated truck, or drowning in the chilly English channel? Why are so many desperate to get here?
The anglo-French agreement on border policy, is in undoubtedly sound one, if the French government turned a blind eye,,,, how many would die?

As for the, UK's immigration officers, why do you assume that their numbers will from now on be static, at the present number, never to be changed whatever the need?
Just the same convoluted nonsense that's constantly spouted about the UK being condemned for eternity to endure a far right governments draconian ways, because the EU can't protect us.
 
longboat said:
What's so bad about, France, that they will risk mutilation and death beneath the wheels of an articulated truck, or drowning in the chilly English channel? Why are so many desperate to get here?
The anglo-French agreement on border policy, is in undoubtedly sound one, if the French government turned a blind eye,,,, how many would die?

As for the, UK's immigration officers, why do you assume that their numbers will from now on be static, at the present number, never to be changed whatever the need?
Just the same convoluted nonsense that's constantly spouted about the UK being condemned for eternity to endure a far right governments draconian ways, because the EU can't protect us.
Click to expand...


Financial constraints, compounded by brexit

But at least you realise you want the far right
 
Jackoftrades said:
Im making no comment directly, just indirectly.

No comment about Scot's insults to me? Or is that ok because he has a similar viewpoint to you ?
Click to expand...


Get over yourself you stupid child, an insult is just that (what Scot said wasn't by the way), disbelieving somebody when they've said something as serious as a family members death, isn't an insult, its just ******* rude beyond rude, if this was my forum, I would ban him for life.
 
Phil the Paver said:
Get over yourself you stupid child, an insult is just that (what Scot said wasn't by the way), disbelieving somebody when they've said something as serious as a family members death, isn't an insult, its just ******* rude beyond rude, if this was my forum, I would ban him for life.
Click to expand...


Typical response.

IGnore facts, hide your head in the sand and then call people names when you expose yourself with weak arguments and comments.

I am happy to challenge longboat, he stays with logic.

We disagree, we are allowed to.

You and scott have lost the plot, if either of you ever had it
 
Jackoftrades said:
Typical response.

IGnore facts, hide your head in the sand and then call people names when you expose yourself with weak arguments and comments.

I am happy to challenge longboat, he stays with logic.

We disagree, we are allowed to.

You and scott have lost the plot, if either of you ever had it
Click to expand...


Based on the subject your talking about here, go **** yourself, you egotistical bigoted ****.
 
Phil the Paver said:
Yes, what are we going to do with all that extra money, 54 million a day, plus all those counties outsidethe EU queuing up to trade with us once we finally leave the single matket



Based on the subject your talking about here, go **** yourself, you egotistical bigoted ****.
Click to expand...


Thank you yet again for exposing yourself as what you are.

Out of logic, out of your depth, out of order
 
Jackoftrades said:
Thank you yet again for exposing yourself as what you are.

Out of logic, out of your depth, out of order
Click to expand...


That post wasn't meant to come with the other, it was a unfinished one, but the other post was far more important in my mind.
 
Jackoftrades said:
Typical response.

IGnore facts, hide your head in the sand and then call people names when you expose yourself with weak arguments and comments.

I am happy to challenge longboat, he stays with logic.

We disagree, we are allowed to.

You and scott have lost the plot, if either of you ever had it
Click to expand...



Right you lot. STOP IT NOW.

How the hell can you bicker like children when someone has announced the loss of a stepson ?

How distasteful can you get.

I will report any more such argument out of respect.

Mr. HandyAndy - Really
 
Devil's Advocate said:
Chip's comment was certainly unfortunate - but I would suggest is completely out of character for the guy.

I also have to say that Phil's and Lanc's readiness to jump on his comment in such a blatantly sanctimonious way - bearing in mind the sorts of things Phil, especially, has said on this and related threads, to be equally uncomfortable.

(I know damn well that Phil wouldn't have said a thing had it been Scott or Harry for instance...)

You need to demonstrate true humanity before you criticise others for a misguided remark. Or whatever it was.
Click to expand...
I'm not watching posts from certain members because I don't believe a word they post, if I've upset them then...
 
longboat said:
Judging solely on the time that chips posted the comment, I would hazard a guess that he'd had a few.
A thought in his head ended up being typed, and I reckon he probably hesitated for a while before thinking 'ah sod it', and hit the post reply button.

Pished or not, it wasn't very nice, inexcusable in fact, and I hope he realises that.
But, da, I've got too agree with Scot on this, you could have just kept quiet for once instead of blaming others for chip's comment.
Your head should be hanging ever lower than his, as you've clearly thought about what ya were doing. :-(
Click to expand...

Very magnanimous of you, Longs - to begin with.

I should have kept quiet? When the usual suspects fell over themselves with their hollow posturing?! Safe in the knowledge that they could claim the 'higher ground' on this without being able to be challenged; 'Me? I am SOOO offended by Chip's remark!'

Too easy, that.

I would accept righteous indignation from people on here who have shown that that is already part of their make-up.

But from Phil?! You gotta be kidding. From Scott? Hah! From you? Um, possibly.

I am making a valid point here, Longs - you wouldn't take as sincere a remark such as that from, say, Trump, would you? Of course not. Let's get closer to home - would you take anything that Farage says on face value? Not a chance.

Ok, what about one of his mindless followers - who have shown themselves ready to spew Farage's hateful propaganda?

Of course Phil and Scott and you may well have been genuinely shocked - I was dismayed by Chips' comment myself. But, as easily likely - based on the political right-wing vitriol and cheap shots constantly hurled by these folk - that they saw it as an open goal.

Phil et al have shown their true mettle on here, so I won't accept anything they claim on face value any more.

You cannot come on here and fill pages with insinuations - without it tainting everything else you say.
 
Phil the Paver said:
I just have to say, " you are a complete ****"
Using what is a totally unnecessary comment and some how turning it into a self imposing I am all important excuse to have a go at me for being upset by it.

One of my favourite saying is
"Some people are simply alive because its illegal to shoot them"
You are one of them.
Click to expand...

Why does that not surprise me as being a favourite saying of yours? :rolleyes:

Phil, I have made it clear on here what I think your moral level is (and got banned for it...).

You provided the evidence for this - repeatedly.

You will hurl mud and post slimy links and make insinuation after insinuation - but never ever STAND UP AND CLAIM WHAT YOU POST AS BEING YOUR TRUE BELIEF.

So what should anyone on here believe anything you say?

You can't have it both ways. And I'm going to make sure that any sly attempt by you to do so is challenged.
 
It appears that a relative of someone has died and they have decided to bring this into the argument. I'm very sorry for their loss but they have decided to bring this up.
Deal with the result of your actions and don't blame someone else for the reaction.
 
chippie244 said:
It appears that a relative of someone has died and they have decided to bring this into the argument. I'm very sorry for their loss but they have decided to bring this up.
Deal with the result of your actions and don't blame someone else for the reaction.
Click to expand...
I merely said I was dropping out of the Brexit post due to our current circumstances Chip, I thought you might understand , but obviously don't.("If it's true ???" ) If I'm on an ignore list by you then I shall make bloody well sure you get the link to the announcement in our local paper, either by private message or by asking another member to quote this post, at which point I will expect an apology, preferably by private message. Whilst I have no problem arguing with you about Brexit, I'm damned if I'm going to argue with you about this subject.
 
We all sympathise, JJ - we all do. I have no doubt about that whatsoever. It is utterly tragic at such a young age, and even more so with a young child being left fatherless.

For whatever reason Chips made that ill-advised remark, it was just a question - "if it's true".

That does not suggest that he "obviously doesn't understand" your reasons for dropping out for a while, but you seem very keen to paint it that way.

I am as certain as I can be that if he simply thought it was true, he would have 'understood'. (I don't know why he questioned it - and I'm not making excuses for him.)

I am as certain as a certain thing that he sympathises every bit as much as everyone else on here (you can take that any way you like).

Some people on here were far too ready to jump on to a sanctimonious bandwagon. I have to ask 'why?' What actual business is it of theirs to involve themselves in this? I think I can guess the reasons why for some of them at least, but they obviously felt safe in giving their opinion here believing it couldn't be challenged.

Based on some of these people's moral mettle as exposed very clearly on this forum, I think it's quite justified to question their motives, as much as they effectively questioned Chip's.

And even in your time of presumed grief, JJ, you too seem desperate to make this point. Why is it so important? Why the demand for an apology?

This is very uncomfortable reading on all sides.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top