DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

Here you can comment on political news, create threads for open discussion.

Moderators: PoshinDevon, Soner, Dragon

Post Reply
User avatar
waz-24-7
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun 24 Aug 2014 2:37 pm

DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 1 of 308 in Discussion

Post by waz-24-7 »

So the Brexit DEAL is now on the table.
Does anyone think its a GOOD deal?
Does the Government take the decision or should the people have their say?
Its no longer about LEAVE or REMAIN.
Now the details are more clear. A level of certainty upon major issues has emerged.
The UK Government appears to be rather weakened and is on the verge of collapse.
The Europeans are in a commanding position.
UK manufacturing is under serious threat of a decline. The economy in general is under threat if the UK goes to basic WTO rules of trade.
What is the best way forward until December 12th when a government vote will determine the future of the UK and its Government and of course its citizens.

Dave G
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 146
Joined: Wed 22 Jun 2016 7:02 am

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 2 of 308 in Discussion

Post by Dave G »

The people have already had their say

User avatar
waddo
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sun 13 May 2012 7:21 am

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 3 of 308 in Discussion

Post by waddo »

351 MP's have already read the "Deal". 351 MP's now have 351 good reasons why it should be a "Deal" and why it should be a "No Deal" and why it should be dumped and another referendum called, plus a vote of confidence/no confidence and a general election! 351 MP's get an average £78,000.00 a year, plus allowances. 351 MP's have had the same amount of time to view the "Deal" as everyone else and still can not come to a decision!

A very small group of MP's, no doubt backed by a vast army of Civil Servants, have worked to beat 27 other nations into the best deal they could possibly get, they have come up with the ONLY deal they will ever get, there is no starting over again with a guy in a bow tie or another group of disenchanted MP's who think they know better.

In answer to your question - NO, I do not think it is a good deal. By the time the UK crashes out of the EU it will have cost a minimum of £27,378,000.00 in MP wages alone and I would really like to know what the overall cost of this debacle will end up being - before the rest of it goes down the tubes?

But then, I have no complaint, the people voted on a yes or no without knowing what either meant - neither did the 351 - so that is that and it is called democracy!
Make happy those who are near and those who are far will come!

User avatar
waz-24-7
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun 24 Aug 2014 2:37 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 4 of 308 in Discussion

Post by waz-24-7 »

I think most recent feedback from the very few voters privileged to make this momentous decision is that the Mrs May DEAL is very likely to be voted down.
If this is indeed the case and the UK departs on 29th March 2019. There is absolutely no formal or published plan B. Not one , at least, that has been published or released to the people .

Certainly the Government (at that time next year) whoever will be in control will be blamed for the failures and outfall as a consequence of the NO DEAL exit.
I do believe the difficulties and issues talked about past months will create real challenges for the UK whilst we try and maintain trade with the EU. ( a body that as of March 2019 will be firmly in the driving seat as the UK is powerless to negotiate or have a say)

I say DEAL and make the best of a very bad job but better than being adrift without a liferaft.

User avatar
waz-24-7
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun 24 Aug 2014 2:37 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 5 of 308 in Discussion

Post by waz-24-7 »

Dave G wrote:The people have already had their say
Oh.
Did that happen today whilst I was at work. OR do you refer to the LEAVE result 2 years ago?
If so its moved on a jot from then.

Joe Soap
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu 12 Apr 2012 7:33 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 6 of 308 in Discussion

Post by Joe Soap »

Not sure if it is a good deal but think the following scenario may happen:

Mrs May’s Deal is rejected by Parliament in December (Brexiteers, Labour, SNP and DUP voting against Govt.

Mrs May remains as PM

Feeble attempt by Mrs May and the Civil Service to prepare for Brexit (mid Dec to 29/3/2019)

UK leaves EU on 29th March 2019 with No deal

Serious Logistical problems follow. E.g. Sterling devalued, catastrophic delays at Ports, food shortages, airport delays for UK holidaymakers, strikes, unemployment, demonstrations... Fear campaign by Treasury, Bank of England, Remainer Tories, CBI, EU etc.

Mrs May tells Nation and MPs these problems would have been avoided had they all supported “My Deal”. (She will refer to the efforts she made to appeal to the MPs and her round the UK trip to gain People support.)

Next year or so continuing problems which Mrs May says I told you so (many of these problems could have been avoided had the Govt effectively prepared for Brexit, but they didn’t do so because they didn’t want the UK to leave the EU.)

Mrs May gets large donations for the forthcoming election from large companies (CBI etc) reminding them it was not her fault there was a No Deal. She reminds them the Labour Party voted against her deal.

Large groundswell of dissatisfaction, (demonstrations from Remainers, students etc, public meetings, BBC and British Press (particularly the "turned" Daily Mail) etc

2022 General election - Mrs May’s Tory Manifesto offers the opportunity of another Referendum

Landslide victory for Mrs May

Referendum called. Remainers win.

2023 UK rejoins EU.

2024 UK replaces £ with Euro
----------------------------------------------------------------------

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3391
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 7 of 308 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

waz-24-7 wrote:
Dave G wrote:The people have already had their say
Oh.
Did that happen today whilst I was at work. OR do you refer to the LEAVE result 2 years ago?
If so its moved on a jot from then.
So the Remain side are only now asking for a second vote?
They weren't bleating about getting a second referendum within 24 hours of losing the first vote?

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 8 of 308 in Discussion

Post by erol »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote:So the Remain side are only now asking for a second vote?
They weren't bleating about getting a second referendum within 24 hours of losing the first vote?

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3391
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 9 of 308 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote:
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:So the Remain side are only now asking for a second vote?
They weren't bleating about getting a second referendum within 24 hours of losing the first vote?
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/10434 ... Jo-Johnson

Mixed messages? Or maybe I could edit 9 seconds out of a video of Gina Miller which appeared to show she didn't believe in a second referendum?

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 10 of 308 in Discussion

Post by erol »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote:Mixed messages? Or maybe I could edit 9 seconds out of a video of Gina Miller which appeared to show she didn't believe in a second referendum?
Or maybe the reality is everyone's opinions can change over time and according to circumstance, whether they voted remain or leave or did not vote at all in the referendum. The idea that all those who voted one way or the other are a single block who all behave and think the same is not one I think holds much water. Some who voted remain did call for a 2nd vote as soon as the first was lost and others did not do this and some even now reject the idea of a new vote. Just as if the vote had gone the other way by a similar margin no doubt there would have been those who voted to leave who would have called and continued to call for another referendum. Calling for something is not the same as being able to get that something. There is little doubt in my mind that the shambolic way in which we have gone about trying to implement 'leaving the EU' and the way tiny minorities on the extremes have been allowed to drive the process has played a large part in why some people are increasingly receptive to the idea of a 2nd vote, whether they voted leave or remain originally.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3391
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 11 of 308 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote: Or maybe the reality is everyone's opinions can change over time and according to circumstance, whether they voted remain or leave or did not vote at all in the referendum.
I have no problem with people changing their minds but I think it is stretching credulity a bit far that Waz has suddenly had a road to Damascus moment and suddenly thought "hey we need a new referendum."

The problem is our PM isn't committed to leaving and is an untalented functionary. She then managed to lose her majority and so has little leverage.
The EU know she isn't committed and hanging on by as thread and do favour the "incorrect answer, have another go" tactic.
I have no desire for a deal that still has us in the EU in all but name. Out is out, the original referendum question was very clear it didn't say shall we rebrand our membership in name only.

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 12 of 308 in Discussion

Post by erol »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote:I have no desire for a deal that still has us in the EU in all but name. Out is out, the original referendum question was very clear it didn't say shall we rebrand our membership in name only.
Is Switzerland in the EU in all but name ? Norway ? Turkey ? I understand that in your head you are clear what 'out' means and meant when you (presumably) voted in the referendum but that does not mean there is and can be no doubt or difference or discussion on what 'out' actually means. Yet it does feel that any 'out' that does not match your own is then portrayed as 'against the will of the people' despite the fact that such an out may indeed be nothing more than an minority extreme view.

turtle
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 865
Joined: Sun 25 Nov 2012 10:44 am

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 13 of 308 in Discussion

Post by turtle »

erol wrote:
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:I have no desire for a deal that still has us in the EU in all but name. Out is out, the original referendum question was very clear it didn't say shall we rebrand our membership in name only.
Is Switzerland in the EU in all but name ? Norway ? Turkey ? I understand that in your head you are clear what 'out' means and meant when you (presumably) voted in the referendum but that does not mean there is and can be no doubt or difference or discussion on what 'out' actually means. Yet it does feel that any 'out' that does not match your own is then portrayed as 'against the will of the people' despite the fact that such an out may indeed be nothing more than an minority extreme view.
A minority extreme view ?...Hmmm perhaps 17.4m possibly more now may disagree with that....it amazes me what goes on in peoples heads !

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 14 of 308 in Discussion

Post by erol »

turtle wrote:
erol wrote:
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:I have no desire for a deal that still has us in the EU in all but name. Out is out, the original referendum question was very clear it didn't say shall we rebrand our membership in name only.
Is Switzerland in the EU in all but name ? Norway ? Turkey ? I understand that in your head you are clear what 'out' means and meant when you (presumably) voted in the referendum but that does not mean there is and can be no doubt or difference or discussion on what 'out' actually means. Yet it does feel that any 'out' that does not match your own is then portrayed as 'against the will of the people' despite the fact that such an out may indeed be nothing more than an minority extreme view.
A minority extreme view ?...Hmmm perhaps 17.4m possibly more now may disagree with that....it amazes me what goes on in peoples heads !
Welcome back turtle.

I think you are missing my point ? No one seriously thinks that Turkey is 'in the EU' because it is in the customs union. Yet there are some in the UK who argue that if the UK stays in the customs union on leaving the EU that would be tant amount to having left 'in name only'. The point is that no one can say that the 17 odd million who voted to leave the EU all also take the view that if we remain in say the customs union then we will in effect only be out of the EU in name only. Yet it feels like some people often do this, trying to make out that not only 17 million people vote to leave the EU , they also all have exactly the same view that staying in say the customs union does not achieve this as the person making such an argument. This is clearly not the case. Some of the 17 million will take the view that staying in the customs union or some for of it is not 'leaving the EU' but just as surely some of those that voted leave do not take this view. The same with the deal on offer. Some who voted leave will consider this to not be leaving the EU and others will take a different view. My problem is with the claim that all 17 million voted that unless we sever all ties with the EU entirely we will not have left the EU. I think this is plainly nonsense myself.

As far as I am concerned the desire for a 'no deal' brexit is clearly a minority view, in parliament and in the wider public. To me such a view is a minority extremist view, just as those who desire is to stay in the EU regardless of the will of the people in 2016 or now is also a minority extremist view. To claim that the 2016 vote means unless we sever all ties with the EU (or reject the deal on offer) then the will of the people is being frustrated is to me an entirely false claim, yet one I hear quite often I think.

The only valid claim that can imo be made is that a majority voted in 2016 to leave the EU. Any claims beyond this, like May's deal does not represent 'leaving the EU' or staying in the customs union would be leaving in name only, can not be made in the name of the 17 million who voted to leave the EU. Attempts to make such claims are to me as 'anti democratic' as anything else that gets given that label and more so than much of what is given that label.

turtle
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 865
Joined: Sun 25 Nov 2012 10:44 am

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 15 of 308 in Discussion

Post by turtle »

Erol
Welcome back !...no need just a fleeting visit..I watch from afar these days.

I mentioned earlier that it amazes me what goes on in peoples head and after your last statement this is what I was eluding to ?.
You have no idea what is going on in peoples mind ...or do you have information you would like to share ?.
Just to remind you the vote was Leave the EU or Stay in the EU and all the pointers as far as I can see are to remain in the EU albeit they lost the referendum...now convince the readers that is democracy.
Not one person I know has changed their mind from what they voted in 2016 not one, the pollsters would have us think otherwise but we all know how reliable the pollsters are so you're analysis of “Extreme” views either way is quite frankly a load of tosh but then again throw enough Ooops about and some of it will stick.
I am of the genuine opinion that the vote is being purposely frustrated by the establishment, and people are and will be threatened with Armageddon if this lame deal does not get the backing Mrs May and the EU wants, the deal is a BRINO and nothing anyone says will convince the Leave voters otherwise.
I would suggest the UK get ready for some trouble ahead.

User avatar
waz-24-7
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun 24 Aug 2014 2:37 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 16 of 308 in Discussion

Post by waz-24-7 »

I am increasingly of the view that the deal will not be ratified.
If that is indeed the case.
Will Mrs May resign on or about the 13th December?

What then. A leadership contest over the festive season?
Then we have until March to gather some thoughts and strategy.

I think the UK public are now in a very anti Europe mindset; given the understandable backlash from European leaders combined with the lack of any plausible deal to leave under advantageous terms.
Will we have a forced general election before March under the promise of a peoples second referendum?
Will a new government secure a NEW strategy or a NEW deal that will rescue us from the envisaged and generally accepted damage of departure without a deal.

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 17 of 308 in Discussion

Post by erol »

turtle wrote:You have no idea what is going on in peoples mind ...or do you have information you would like to share ?
and you also say
turtle wrote:the deal is a BRINO and nothing anyone says will convince the Leave voters otherwise.
Am I not allowed to wonder or ask how it is you know what was and is in the mind of all 17 million of those who voted to leave ? I know that some of those who voted leave do not consider May's deal to be BRINO because they have very publicly said so. Andrea Leadstrom to give one high profile example but there are plenty of others. I am sorry but for me, your claim, if it is what you claim, that all 17 million that voted to leave in 2016 all also consider May's deal to be BRINO, is plainly and patently not the case. I see this all the time - people claiming that their personal view on if (to give one example) May's deal is BRINO is also clearly the view of the 17 million majority that voted in 2016 when so plainly and clearly it is not. To take a vote on one issue and make out it provides a mandate for a different issue is in my mind inherently in and off itself 'anti democratic' and as far as you are doing this (claiming that all 17 million that voted leave in 2016 also think that Mays deal is BRINO) then I think you are being anti democratic by doing so.
turtle wrote:I am of the genuine opinion that the vote is being purposely frustrated by the establishment, .....
As I am of the opinion (genuinely) that the biggest threat to the UK ending up not leaving the EU at all are that very extreme minority that have sought to get their maximal wants and nothing else by trying to make out they are the wants of the 17 million who voted leave in 2016. I also think you should amend your statement to say 'frustrated by parts of the establishment' because for me the idea that the likes of Johnson, Mogg, Davis and Farage are not themselves entirely of the 'establishment' is risible to be frank.

turtle
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 865
Joined: Sun 25 Nov 2012 10:44 am

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 18 of 308 in Discussion

Post by turtle »

You mention Andrea Leadsom i will add Michael Gove to that....hardly working class people from North of Watford...who knows what they have been promised by Mrs May to stay whipped in line.?

what you need to understand Erol is Mogg, Johnson Farage and Davis are of the same opinion as they were just after the vote so no real discussion there yes i have to agree that some (i or you have absolutely no idea) have changed their mind as to leave or remain but your claim of extreme minorities is fanciful at best you have trod the same path since the vote and banged on constantly about what rolls around your brain and you truly believe your own hype....crack on im sure some poor soul will agree with you somewhere.
I now remember one of the reasons why i give the forum a wide berth now... arguing black is white regardless ...somethings never change.
I will get back in my box now.

thickey
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 116
Joined: Tue 27 Jan 2015 3:06 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 19 of 308 in Discussion

Post by thickey »

The politicians keep saying we've had one referendum the people have spoken so there shouldn't be another one. so does this thinking apply to Scotland who voted against independence OR will they be having another referendum?

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 20 of 308 in Discussion

Post by erol »

turtle wrote:what you need to understand Erol is Mogg, Johnson Farage and Davis are of the same opinion as they were just after the vote so no real discussion there
I only mentioned them in passing in relation to the idea that the 'people' want one thing and the 'establishment' is stopping them from having it, to make the point that, as constant as they may have been in their position, you can not seriously say these people are not themselves the very embodiment of the 'establishment'. As for constancy of their position on Brexit, I would not include Johnson on that list. I remember the whole 'will he wont he' charade as to if he would even support leave or not back then.
turtle wrote:yes i have to agree that some (i or you have absolutely no idea) have changed their mind as to leave or remain
I am not talking about people having changed their minds on leaving the EU or not. What I am talking about is people claiming that all those who voted leave in 2016 also think (here you can place whatever suits your own agenda and people often do) that May's deal is BRINO. We know a majority voted to leave the EU in 2016. We do NOT know that all of them also think May's deal is BRINO. That is the entire point I am making here and that you seem intent on ignoring. The only way we could know if a majority think it is BRINO would be to have a referendum that asked that question. Taking a referendum that asked a different question and then insiting the result of that means they also think May's deal is BRINO is in my genuine personal view inherently contemptuous of 'democracy'. Just stating and insisting that they all share your own personal view on this specific simply because they voted to leave in 2016 and anyone who says otherwise is being 'fanciful' is something but it is not imo 'democracy'.
turtle wrote:but your claim of extreme minorities is fanciful at best...
So those who want and will accept nothing else other than a no deal crash out exit from the EU are not a minority ? Or those that want no trade relationship with the EU other than WTO rules ? Come on who is being fanciful here ? Mogg can not even get the 48 letters from conservative MP's to force a leadership challenge , but he is not in an extreme minority of opinion ?

User avatar
waddo
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sun 13 May 2012 7:21 am

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 21 of 308 in Discussion

Post by waddo »

This is what happens when you take a knife to a gunfight - it looks good to start with but it always ends up the same way. 1 Nation is going to get a really good deal from 27 other Nations and nobody will think bad of them or try to get the better of them - dream on.
Make happy those who are near and those who are far will come!

User avatar
waz-24-7
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun 24 Aug 2014 2:37 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 22 of 308 in Discussion

Post by waz-24-7 »

I agree with Erol,
BRINO ( Brexit in name only) is the real DEAL. Is it what the BREXITEERS want or hoped for.? I think not. REMAINERS like myself view it as a loss leader to remain by enlarge within the single market and under EU law.
The proposed DEAL is the worst for both sides. It would be far better to REMAIN totally. This is unlikely at this juncture.

The mess looks to get even messier in coming days as the privileged cast their votes whilst the people either accept it or seek political change in a new government or possibly further referendum.
I fear that damage has already been inflicted. Major corporations and businesses have instigated their plan "B" with the UK being (in part) pushed aside for a preferential European gateway.

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 23 of 308 in Discussion

Post by erol »

My personal view on BRINO (Brexit in name only) is pretty simple and straight forward. To me what defines if a Country is or is not in the EU is not determined by if that country pays money in to the EU or allows free movement of people. What defines if a country is in the EU or not, in theory and in practice, is do they have a 'seat at the table' or not. Do they have an allocation of MEP's in the EU parliament, allocation of Commissioners in the Commission and a place in the Council. For me any Country that has these things is in the EU and any that does not is not. It really is that simple.

Norway pays in to the EU budget and allows free movement of EU citizens but does not have Norwegian MEP's , Commissioners or a place on the Council and thus is not in the EU. Turkey is a part of the Customs Union but there are no Turkish MEPs, Commissioners or person on the Council and thus is not in the EU.

Thus for me any deal / scenario that means we no longer have UK MEP's , Commissioners and place on the EU Council, is one in which the UK has left the EU. In essence this and only this is what the referendum vote represented in terms of the 'will of the people' - that the UK would move from a situation where it does have MEPs. Commissioners and place on Council (in the EU) to a scenario where i no longer has these things (not in the EU). Claims that the referendum vote represented the will of the UK's population to not be in the or a customs union with the EU, or not be a part of the EEA are to me simply not credible. We voted in essence to no longer have representation in the EU three main bodies (parliament, commission and council) and nothing else.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3391
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 24 of 308 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote:
We voted in essence to no longer have representation in the EU three main bodies (parliament, commission and council) and nothing else.
I think you'll find that 17.4 million people voted to get their sovereignty back and get the final say in the day to day running and the future of their country.
Project fear would have done far better if they would have said that we have surreptitiously given away our sovereignty and you wont find a politician that is acceptable to his party who will be brave enough to get it back.

We need to start from the beginning and negotiate what is and what isn't acceptable to the British people and be prepared to walk away.

The EU were always going to make it as hard as possible to leave as they know we won't be the last. They will only have been encouraged in their efforts by the constant whinging from the remainers since the day after the referendum.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3391
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 25 of 308 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

waz-24-7 wrote: The proposed DEAL is the worst for both sides.
Who do you think helped get such a bad deal?
Brexiters who said we are prepared to leave without a deal if the EU is unfair?
Or Remainers who have complained since the day after the referendum gone on marches and encouraged the EU?


You keep quoting the Second World war Waz and your knowledge of history. Let's test that.
Do you think the air of appeasement in Britain and France encouraged Hitler or discouraged him?
waz-24-7 wrote: It would be far better to REMAIN totally.
Wow that's a bolt from the blue!
I think if the EU offered us £1 million per person and the ability to pick and choose our wish lift you'd say it's better to remain. Still thanks to you and yours appeasement it looks like it will turn into the [email protected]#k you have been praying for.
waz-24-7 wrote:
as the privileged cast their votes
That line again. Let's be honest Waz in your perfect world the privileged would be just those that agreed with you. The elections you would like would involve people having their votes examined and then discounted because they are obviously mentally defective if they disagree with you.
I really don't know why you don't move to Germany or France. You don't appear to have any great love of your country and contempt for half its population.
You get to stay in the EU and as a bonus within ten years you'll get the far right governments in both which will be the first step to ensure future elections will be run along the lines you want.
waz-24-7 wrote: Major corporations and businesses have instigated their plan "B" with the UK being (in part) pushed aside for a preferential European gateway.
Can you provide links to their company reports to their shareholders detailing these plan Bs?

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 26 of 308 in Discussion

Post by erol »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote:I think you'll find that 17.4 million people voted to get their sovereignty back and get the final say in the day to day running and the future of their country.
Which is exactly the kind of claim I have been talking about and that I think are just not credible. The referendum question was not 'should the UK take back sovereignty'. The question was should we remain in the EU , which by definition means should we continue to have a place at the EU table or not. You may well have voted we should leave the EU because you believed it was a means of taking back sovereignty but to claim as some kind of indisputable fact that this is why 17 million other people vote to leave is to me clearly not a supportable claim, outside of rhetoric and bombast.

Being a member of WTO places limits on the UK's sovereignty. Sure you will say 'ah but we can unilaterally choose to leave the WTO. Yet exactly the same is true of say being in the or a customs union with the EU. For me there is just no consistency or logic in your position I am afraid.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:We need to start from the beginning and negotiate what is and what isn't acceptable to the British people and be prepared to walk away.
The only way to know if the British people consider it acceptable to be in the or a customs union with the EU after we leave the EU (no longer have a place at the table) would be to ask them via a referendum. You can claim all you like that when they voted to leave the EU they already gave their view on this but for me that is just not true.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:The EU were always going to make it as hard as possible to leave as they know we won't be the last. They will only have been encouraged in their efforts by the constant whinging from the remainers since the day after the referendum.
As far as encouraging the EU to play hard ball with the UK of the terms of it's withdrawal from the EU (no longer having a seat at the table) I would suggest that those who state that the UK leaving the EU will be the start of the destruction of the EU itself have done far more to encourage them to do such that anything those 'of the people' who are expressing a desire to not lose the UK's seat at the table have done.

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 27 of 308 in Discussion

Post by erol »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote: Who do you think helped get such a bad deal?
Brexiters who said we are prepared to leave without a deal if the EU is unfair?
Or Remainers who have complained since the day after the referendum gone on marches and encouraged the EU?
We are getting a bad deal because we played out a bad strategy, walking in to the EU trap of saying nothing can be discussed until we trigger article 50. If we had after the referendum vote said to the EU , if you will not sensibly talk about means and ways the UK can leave the EU we will then remain in it and block and obstruct all that we can until you re consider this position. We are getting a bad deal because we gave up the best leverage we had in order to get a good deal. The reason why we did this imo is that the hard line leavers feared, rather than respected, the will of the people and their right to change their mind over time and thus used all pressure and leverage they could to encourage us to walk in to this EU trap and trigger article 50 before it made any sense to do so.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3391
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 28 of 308 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote: You may well have voted we should leave the EU because you believed it was a means of taking back sovereignty but to claim as some kind of indisputable fact that this is why 17 million other people vote to leave is to me clearly not a supportable claim, outside of rhetoric and bombast.
I'd be prepared to question all of the 17.4 million and ask why they voted as they voted and be 100% confident that most voted out of anger at what the EU has become and fears out of what it will become. And pivotol to that is sovereignty.

Any people of a nation that is a nation in anything but name like to feel they have the final say in the laws of their country, control of its borders, control of its economy and currency and control of its security.
Most people are realistic to know that along the way compromises have to be made but the things listed above I think were why people voted to leave.


We were taken into an organisation that was sold to us as a trading community and has morphed into what it is today. We were lied to or at least the truth was witheld and people reacted and voted to leave.


Why do you think people voted to leave?
Because the whole of Britain is racist despite zero evidence to support this?
Seventeen million people are stupid and shouldn't really be allowed to vote on anything?
They didn't like the EU flag?


We have a fair few people who are on both sides of this debate, lets ask them why they voted to leave. I'm confident

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3391
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 29 of 308 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote: We are getting a bad deal because we played out a bad strategy, walking in to the EU trap of saying nothing can be discussed until we trigger article 50.
Our friends and brothers in the EU would trap us? Surely not! I thought that as the EU is the only thing stopping a European war breaking out that they would do anything to compromise and keep us in and keep the peace?

We are getting a bad deal for a number of reasons.
We got stuck with a PM who doesn't want to leave and isn't that interested in the will of the people. Her only ambition is to stay in her post for which she has been over promoted.
Our politicians are revealing how little integrity they have. Corbyn has been anti EU his entire career but will back flip if he thinks it will get him in.

The people tasked on our side with negotiating do not have the will to do it.

We have been bullied by the EU for most of the time in it so why would they change? Cameron begged Merkel to bend a little to help him win the referendum and she refused.

The EU know that if we get anything half decent others will leave and they are negotiating with a minority government hanging on for dear life.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of how capable they might generally be, had the Johnson and Gove ticket taken power then the EU would have negotiated far differently. Now they know they are pushing at an open door.

The quote from the Australian chap was pretty much on the money but no doubt you would call it too simplistic.
Thing is, life ain't that complicated. Human nature is human nature.
If you are weak you get bullied. It isn't how the world should be but sadly it is how it is.
If you contantly lie to people don't be surpised when they don't listen to you anymore.

It's all poker. If you bluff too much you get called when the person realises that actually they have got a decent hand or too good a hand to throw in again.

User avatar
PoshinDevon
Kibkom Mod
Kibkom Mod
Posts: 2285
Joined: Wed 04 Apr 2012 6:32 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 30 of 308 in Discussion

Post by PoshinDevon »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote:
erol wrote: You may well have voted we should leave the EU because you believed it was a means of taking back sovereignty but to claim as some kind of indisputable fact that this is why 17 million other people vote to leave is to me clearly not a supportable claim, outside of rhetoric and bombast.
I'd be prepared to question all of the 17.4 million and ask why they voted as they voted and be 100% confident that most voted out of anger at what the EU has become and fears out of what it will become. And pivotol to that is sovereignty.

Any people of a nation that is a nation in anything but name like to feel they have the final say in the laws of their country, control of its borders, control of its economy and currency and control of its security.
Most people are realistic to know that along the way compromises have to be made but the things listed above I think were why people voted to leave.

Exactly the reasons I voted leave.

Despite what some make think or even believe I was fully prepared for compromises prior to our leaving. What has been presented as our agreement to leave has imo gone to far.


We were taken into an organisation that was sold to us as a trading community and has morphed into what it is today. We were lied to or at least the truth was witheld and people reacted and voted to leave.


Why do you think people voted to leave?
Because the whole of Britain is racist despite zero evidence to support this?
Seventeen million people are stupid and shouldn't really be allowed to vote on anything?
They didn't like the EU flag?

The number of migrants entering the U.K. was NOT the number one reason for me voting leave. I fully understand that we do need a certain number of migrants entering the U.K. to not only to add their talents to the growth of our country but also to continue to make the U.K. a diverse, multi cultural country which in the main is tolerant of all people and faiths. However; there has to be some controls in place.

The “all those who voted leave are stupid” line, is something that used to be tiresome and annoying, however I have learnt to ignore.

The E.U. flag........it’s a bit meh! But hey it’s a flag and if their is a need then fine.


We have a fair few people who are on both sides of this debate, lets ask them why they voted to leave. I'm confident
Life is not about waiting for the storm to pass,it's about learning to dance in the rain

Peterborough Utd -The Posh

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 31 of 308 in Discussion

Post by erol »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote:I'd be prepared to question all of the 17.4 million and ask why they voted as they voted ....
You can, somewhat ridiculously imo, claim you are prepared to ask the 17.4 million why they voted leave but the non ridiculous fact is that you have and continue to claim that you know what the answer is without having to ask them and present such as 'fact'. Which is exactly what I am challenging here.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:and be 100% confident that most voted out of anger at what the EU has become and fears out of what it will become. And pivotol to that is sovereignty.
Most ? So you accept that it is possible that not all did so ? It would only need a 1% or so of those who voted leave to have done so for reasons other than 'sovereignty' for the argument that a majority voted 'to get back sovereignty' to be invalid.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:Any people of a nation that is a nation in anything but name like to feel they have the final say in the laws of their country, control of its borders, control of its economy and currency and control of its security.
Any people , other of course than those people of the 27 nations that are in the EU ?
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:We were taken into an organisation that was sold to us as a trading community and has morphed into what it is today. We were lied to or at least the truth was witheld and people reacted and voted to leave.
We were taken in to the EEC and then democratically voted via referendum 3 years later to stay in to a community that some warned would evolve from a trading community into increasing political union, which could only and did only happen because our democratically elected leaders consented to such changes.

If the argument is we joined a trading community and it became something else, then why is remaining in the or a customs union not a viable way forward to leaving the EU ? We joined a trading community, it became (with our unilateral consent) something more than that so we now must leave not just the EU but also the 'trading community' part of it as well. Makes no sense to me ? You need to explain to me why being in a customs union with the EU is an 'unacceptable' ceding of sovereignty but being part of the WTO is not and so far you have failed to do that from where I am sitting.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:Why do you think people voted to leave?
For a whole range of reasons. What I am pointing out is the way people from Mogg to yourself will happily claim, as if indisputable fact, that all 17 million voted leave because they also agree with you on things like customs union or EEA membership or support for crash out exit, when such is just not true as far as I am concerned.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:Because the whole of Britain is racist despite zero evidence to support this?
Yet more nonsense and trying to put words in to my mouth. Of course I do not think the 17.4 million who voted leave (including my mother) are all racist, let alone 'the whole of Britain'. However I do think there are racists in the UK and I do also think it is well within the realms of possibility that they voted leave because they are racists more than because of issues of 'sovereignty'. It would only need to be just over 1% of those who voted leave to have done so because they are racists, for the argument that a majority of the UK population voted to leave the EU because of 'sovereignty' to be untrue.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:Seventeen million people are stupid and shouldn't really be allowed to vote on anything?
Yet more 'straw man' arguing as far as I am concerned. Where have I ever said this or that I think this ?
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:They didn't like the EU flag?
More nonsense then. If you want to believe that the only reasons why people voted to leave where exactly the same as the reasons why you chose to vote that way and that they all must also agree with you as well on issues like remaining in a customs union after we leave, then go ahead. Just do not expect me to take that as evidence of anything other than perhaps your own egotism and willingness to claim anything you like in support of what you want.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:We have a fair few people who are on both sides of this debate, lets ask them why they voted to leave. I'm confident
Or you (and other extreme leavers) could just stop making claims in the name of a (tiny) majority that are just not supportable ?

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 32 of 308 in Discussion

Post by erol »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote: Our friends and brothers in the EU would trap us? Surely not!
Our 'friends' in the EU, once we said we want to leave the EU, behaved in a way that was best for them and they did indeed set up a 'trap' as far as I am concerned. Nothing complicated in that , just human nature. If you are a member of my club for 40 years and then tell me that you want to leave and discuss terms as to how you do that, whilst also telling me and everyone else that your leaving is the start of the death and extinction of my club entirely, you would then expect me to offer you attractive terms to leave ? Yeah right.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:Corbyn has been anti EU his entire career but will back flip if he thinks it will get him in.
You will get no defence from me with regard to how Labour under Corbyn has handled the whole Brexit affair.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:We have been bullied by the EU for most of the time in it so why would they change?
Again an easy assertion to make but a much harder one to back up with evidence. We were 'bullied' by the EU in to getting the rebate were we ? You know why it is called a 'rebate' ? Not because we pay money in and then get some of it back (we do not). It is called a rebate because the entire 'bullying' EU accepted that the proportion of our contribution was unfair and and so they did not just reduce the EU budget by the amount less that we would pay but instead agreed to, amongst themselves, make up the shortfall. Our rebate is made up for by the other EU members, most of which are far less wealthy than the UK is. This then is one part of the historic 'evidence' that we have been 'bullied' whilst in the EU.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:Cameron begged Merkel to bend a little to help him win the referendum and she refused.
In my view Cameron pledged to and then did give a referendum to the UK people on EU membership because of narrow personal and party political motivations, regardless of the bad timing or the damage doing so could potentially do to the UK and the EU. In any case the kind of concessions that would have been needed to get a different result at the referendum were not possible outside of an EU wide treaty negotiation imo.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:The EU know that if we get anything half decent others will leave and they are negotiating with a minority government hanging on for dear life.
It was plainly obvious to me at least that for the EU the existential threat to the very existence of the EU itself in to the future, posed by the UK leaving the EU whilst being able to keep the majority of the benefits and none of the costs or compromises, would be at the core of their position in any future negotiations. Which is why claims like 'securing a trade deal with the EU after we leave will be the easiest trade deal ever negotiated in history' or that 'of course they will give us a good trade deal because they want to keep selling the same amount of Mercedes and Proseco to us' were and are plain nonsense. If the choice for a country like Germany is create a situation that puts the very future survival of the EU at risk or have to sell us Mercedes under WTO rules, then it is pretty obvious which is the lesser of two unattractive futures. Simple and just human nature.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:Whatever the rights and wrongs of how capable they might generally be, had the Johnson and Gove ticket taken power then the EU would have negotiated far differently. Now they know they are pushing at an open door.
No doubt there would have been differences had these backstabbing, self serving, clowns been in the driving seat. However the idea that the EU would have been more prepared to risk destruction of the EU entirely if they had been in charge is to me risible. I consider it perfectly within the realms of possibility that had these hard liners been in the driving seat the response from the EU would have been 'in kind' leaving us with either a worse deal than May's one or no deal at all.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:If you are weak you get bullied. It isn't how the world should be but sadly it is how it is.
No one would consider Greece to be or ever having been one of the 'strongest' EU members. When they wanted something that no one else in the EU wanted, namely that the RoC be admitted as a new member regardless of a settlement, they did not threaten 'let Cyprus in or we will leave the EU' because such a threat was near empty and they knew such a threat would be met with 'ok, see you'. What they did was say unless you give us what we want in regards to Cyprus entry we will stay in the EU (and there is no mechanism by which a county can be expelled from the EU against it's own will) and veto and block any further expansion at all. They got what they wanted from the 'bullying' EU in that case despite being at that time one of the weakest member states by any metric chosen.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:If you contantly lie to people don't be surpised when they don't listen to you anymore.
Unless you are on the side of 'leave' presumably ? In which case lying is not reason to not listen to such people at all. The claim that 350 million could be save and could be spent on the NHS if we leave was a lie. No ifs and no buts, its was an out and out lie.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:It's all poker. If you bluff too much you get called when the person realises that actually they have got a decent hand or too good a hand to throw in again.
If you want poker analogy , then the trap the EU set for us by saying there can be no discussion until you trigger article 50, is akin to saying you can play this hand of poker with us but you have to go all in, not just before you see the flop but before you even see your own hand. The only sensible approach to that should be 'no thanks I think ill decline to play under those terms and wait until you change your mind on those conditions'. But the hard line leavers did everything they could and succeeded in getting us to say 'yeah fine' and I believe the reason they did this is they feared that if there was any delay at all in playing a hand, the tiny democratic mandate they had from the people in 2016 to go ahead and play poker might well evaporate.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3391
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 33 of 308 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote: You can, somewhat ridiculously imo, claim you are prepared to ask the 17.4 million why they voted leave but the non ridiculous fact is that you have and continue to claim that you know what the answer is without having to ask them and present such as 'fact'. Which is exactly what I am challenging here.
I know as a contrarian it doesn’t suit to nail your colours to the mast but care to guess why 17.4 million people decided to vote leave? I am not claiming to speak for them but I’m confident that the reasons I outlined were why they did.
And here is the first vote on our mini poll.
PoshinDevon wrote: Exactly the reasons I voted leave.
So again why? Is it because they didn’t understand the issues like the more educated people? It’s a bitch they have the vote huh?
erol wrote: Any people , other of course than those people of the 27 nations that are in the EU ?
And the best of luck to them. 18 get more out than they put in so I guess to prop up your economy you make compromises. If you promise to pay my rent Erol I’m happy for you to pick my wallpaper.
erol wrote: We were taken in to the EEC and then democratically voted via referendum 3 years later to stay in to a community that some warned would evolve from a trading community into increasing political union, which could only and did only happen because our democratically elected leaders consented to such changes.
The some that warned that way were pretty much derided as lying but that’s another story.
Anyhow now the electorate voted in huge numbers and informed their democratically elected leaders they want out. I can’t be the only person to remember a fair few of our democratically leaders including arch Europhile Ken Clarke taking great pride in saying they hadn’t even read some of the treaties they were signing us up for. Criminal really.
erol wrote: so we now must leave not just the EU but also the 'trading community' part of it as well.
So we can just join the trading club and can do so without conceding any control of our borders and laws etc? Really? Can you tell the EU that is the deal because I’m up for that.
I got the impression that if we bought the car we had to buy the go faster stripes, the hi-fi and commit to giving a stranger a lift for the rest of our lives? My mistake
erol wrote: However I do think there are racists in the UK and I do also think it is well within the realms of possibility that they voted leave because they are racists more than because of issues of 'sovereignty'. It would only need to be just over 1% of those who voted leave to have done so because they are racists, for the argument that a majority of the UK population voted to leave the EU because of 'sovereignty' to be untrue.
So the racists were the difference? Come on Erol, say what you think.
Well let’s have a look at the referendum vote.
17,410,742 voted leave and 16,141,241 voted remain. So by my maths 1,269,501 more voted to leave than remain. Any argument so far?
I know you like a % because it is easier to spin those so let’s do percentages. 51.89% voted to leave and 48.11% voted to remain so 3.78% of the votes cast were the difference.
The BNP for the last two elections have polled a total of 6,309 votes. I’m happy for you to throw in the English Democrats as well so we are looking at less than 7,000 died in the wool racists that vote that way in an election. I’m happy to concede that every single one of them voted to leave so that’s 7,000 out of 1,269,501 or if you prefer 0.02% of the total votes in the referendum or lets say 0.04% of the leave votes. Quite a way short of 1% and not exactly a game changer.
If you would like to lump every single UKIP voter as being a racist that’s another 600,000 votes as at the last election. So by libelling all the UKIP voters you get to 1.8% but still less than half of 1,269,501 so not a majority.
erol wrote: If you want to believe that the only reasons why people voted to leave where exactly the same as the reasons why you chose to vote that way
I’ve outlined why I think people voted to leave and hopefully people who voted to leave on the forum will confirm why they voted leave. I’m very confident.

turtle
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 865
Joined: Sun 25 Nov 2012 10:44 am

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 34 of 308 in Discussion

Post by turtle »

erol wrote:
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:I think you'll find that 17.4 million people voted to get their sovereignty back and get the final say in the day to day running and the future of their country.
Which is exactly the kind of claim I have been talking about and that I think are just not credible. The referendum question was not 'should the UK take back sovereignty'. The question was should we remain in the EU , which by definition means should we continue to have a place at the EU table or not. You may well have voted we should leave the EU because you believed it was a means of taking back sovereignty but to claim as some kind of indisputable fact that this is why 17 million other people vote to leave is to me clearly not a supportable claim, outside of rhetoric and bombast.

Being a member of WTO places limits on the UK's sovereignty. Sure you will say 'ah but we can unilaterally choose to leave the WTO. Yet exactly the same is true of say being in the or a customs union with the EU. For me there is just no consistency or logic in your position I am afraid.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:We need to start from the beginning and negotiate what is and what isn't acceptable to the British people and be prepared to walk away.
The only way to know if the British people consider it acceptable to be in the or a customs union with the EU after we leave the EU (no longer have a place at the table) would be to ask them via a referendum. You can claim all you like that when they voted to leave the EU they already gave their view on this but for me that is just not true.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:The EU were always going to make it as hard as possible to leave as they know we won't be the last. They will only have been encouraged in their efforts by the constant whinging from the remainers since the day after the referendum.
As far as encouraging the EU to play hard ball with the UK of the terms of it's withdrawal from the EU (no longer having a seat at the table) I would suggest that those who state that the UK leaving the EU will be the start of the destruction of the EU itself have done far more to encourage them to do such that anything those 'of the people' who are expressing a desire to not lose the UK's seat at the table have done.
Erol
It does appear that you must think that all leave voters had the same reason for leaving the EU, which I would guess is the subject of Immigration, You rebuke both ETS and myself for “speaking on behalf of all leave voters” then go on to pontificate and lecture us on how both leave and remain voters actually think ?. Is it that hard for you to understand that the leave contingent may have done some homework before they voted and perhaps over the last 10 years (as I have) got that fed up with how the EU works and has become a dictatorship to all 28members as we move forward?.. Fraulein Merkel and that idiot Verhofstadt have both demanded recently we all abandon sovereignty of our countries and remainers appear to agree with this.
Is it beyond rational thinking that most if not all Leavers have numerous reasons for voting the way they did ?
We all know that there is lots wrong with the EU (or at least some of us do) and there was an argument of staying in and fighting to change it from within,...I actually agreed with that at the time until the UK was humiliated again when Cameron had his ass slapped and was sent packing so I think we all know that reform of the dictatorship is highly unlikely, they would see it crumble and fall first.
As for having a seat at the table well the last 2 years has proved the EU have no intention of letting us have a say, this parting is going to hurt the EU very badly with their trade with the UK but they simply do not care,,,couldn’t give a toss.
It seriously worries me that the last 2 public engagements old Drunker has attended has resulted him in being carried out of the room drunk as a skunk and the last one he went to an important meeting with odd shoes on one brown and one black....I ask all remainers in all honesty is this the kind of leader you wish to control your lives....seriously ?

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3391
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 35 of 308 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

turtle wrote: You rebuke both ETS and myself for “speaking on behalf of all leave voters” then go on to pontificate and lecture us on how both leave and remain voters actually think ?
Welcome back to the twilight zone Turtle.

Can I take it that you are another vote who agrees with my arrogant guess on why people voted to leave?

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3391
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 36 of 308 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote:
If you want poker analogy , then the trap the EU set for us by saying there can be no discussion until you trigger article 50, is akin to saying you can play this hand of poker with us but you have to go all in, not just before you see the flop but before you even see your own hand. The only sensible approach to that should be 'no thanks I think ill decline to play under those terms and wait until you change your mind on those conditions'.
Erol if we were playing poker and you offered me an all in option with us both playing blind I'd take it so it's back on you.
Just to let you know, I don't bluff I'll always shoot a hostage.

Need to sort a game of poker out my man.

turtle
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 865
Joined: Sun 25 Nov 2012 10:44 am

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 37 of 308 in Discussion

Post by turtle »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote:
turtle wrote: You rebuke both ETS and myself for “speaking on behalf of all leave voters” then go on to pontificate and lecture us on how both leave and remain voters actually think ?
Welcome back to the twilight zone Turtle.

Can I take it that you are another vote who agrees with my arrogant guess on why people voted to leave?
I voted leave for various reasons...
Sovereignty
Fishing
Unhindered World trade
Diminishing trade with the EU
And all those hideous rules more than 50,000
Bananas in small bunches...Stupid
Vacuum cleaners, Kettles, Hair driers...What,s that all about ?
And one very close to my heart the EU want to revoke All Type 1 Diabetics driving licences,.. Who the hell do they think they are.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3391
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 38 of 308 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

turtle wrote: Who the hell do they think they are.
They want to micro manage your life. Appeals to some.
The lightbulbs and hoovers was another cracker for me.

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 39 of 308 in Discussion

Post by erol »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote: I am not claiming to speak for them but I’m confident that the reasons I outlined were why they did.
Well forgive me if I get a somewhat different impression when you post things like
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:I think you'll find that 17.4 million people voted to get their sovereignty back and get the final say in the day to day running and the future of their country.
Can you see how to me the above does indeed appear to be you speaking for all 17.4 million of them ?
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:I know as a contrarian it doesn’t suit to nail your colours to the mast but care to guess why 17.4 million people decided to vote leave?
I may well be a contrarian but that is not the reason why I have not, unlike some, gone around claiming that I know why all 17.4 million voted leave. I have not made such claims because I do not know what range of reasons any given individual had and what priorities within those reasons were most important to them. What is more not only do I not know I am of the opinion that no one knows , which is why when you come along and create an impression that you do know, I challenge that.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:So again why?
If you want me to speculate on the reasons why people voted leave then sure I can play that game though I see little point myself. What I am pretty much certain of is the chance that all of them voted leave is for exactly the same reason you did and or that they all share the same views as you as to if remaining in a customs union is BRINO or not, is close to zero.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:Is it because they didn’t understand the issues like the more educated people? It’s a bitch they have the vote huh?
Is this not your argument as to what happened in the 75 referendum. That people were lied too and did not really understand what it was they were voting for ? Like I say I have always been a fan of consistency. I have never claimed the people 'did not understand' either for the 75 referendum or for the 2016 one. You, to me, appear to claim they were mislead and did not really understand what they were voting for in 75 but are infallible in 2016 ?
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:And the best of luck to them. 18 get more out than they put in so I guess to prop up your economy you make compromises.
And nine do not, which is still enough to pose some challenge to your claim that 'Any people of a nation that is a nation....." as far as I am concerned. In any case the idea that Germany (or any of the other 9) believe they get no benefits to them nationally of EU membership is itself a false one as far as I am concerned.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:If you promise to pay my rent Erol I’m happy for you to pick my wallpaper.
A bad analogy to my mind. A more apposite one would be along the lines of I agree we will both contribute to both our rents but I will as a higher earner than you pay a greater proportion to your rent than you pay towards mine on the understanding you will buy your wallpaper and carpet and furniture from my companies and not someone else.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:So we can just join the trading club and can do so without conceding any control of our borders and laws etc? Really? Can you tell the EU that is the deal because I’m up for that.
Look back when we joined a 'trading club' in 73 and voted to remain in 75, the rules of that club as it was then, that you claim (as far as I understand it) was something you were happy with and would have been fine to continue if things had stayed that way, required ceding of some degree of sovereignty. So you still need to explain to me why remaining in the customs union after we leave the EU is such an anathema to you but the 'trading club' in 73/5 that also require some voluntary ceding of sovereignty was 'ok' ? You can not, for me in terms of logic and consistency, say those concessions were fine in 75 but are not now fine now because such today would also require the same concessions 'happily' made in 75 as a reason why remaining in a customs union is bad. If your argument was the concessions were bad back in 75 even when the EU was the EEC and just a 'trading club' and remain bad today - that I could respect as a consistent position. Saying they were ok in 75 but are bad now is not such I am afraid.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:I got the impression that if we bought the car we had to buy the go faster stripes, the hi-fi and commit to giving a stranger a lift for the rest of our lives? My mistake
The concessions to 'sovereignty' required to be part of the customs union, for countries like Turkey, or for the UK should it seek such today, are in broad terms less than those we agreed to in 73/5.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:So the racists were the difference? Come on Erol, say what you think.
I never said the racists were the difference. Seems little need or point in me saying what I think when you are so ready and willing to tell me and everyone else what I think and have said. So having set up the straw man you then go an knock it down.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:Well let’s have a look at the referendum vote....
My point was very simple and very plain. In order for you claim that a majority 'voted to get their sovereignty back' to be false only a tiny proportion of those who voted leave would have had to done so for some reason or priority other than 'sovereignty'. Racists would be one potential part of this group that would invalid entirely your 'majority' claim imo. There are others that I could speculate about as well. That you want to try and run the numbers based on a false premise that I am saying the only people who voted leave for a reason or priority other than 'sovereignty' are racists is you problem not mine. I did not say this and am not saying this. I used them as an example of one group but certainly not the only one that could have voted leave for priorities others than 'sovereignty'.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:I’ve outlined why I think people voted to leave ....
Maybe this is down to me misunderstanding what you wrote when you said "I think you'll find that 17.4 million people voted to get their sovereignty back". That to me did not come across as you stating an opinion of what you personally thought. It came across as you stating some kind of fact or objective reality. An assertion that I think is far from a fact or statement of objective reality and thus I have explained to the best of my ability why I think so. However this is not a 'singular' incident. I see this 'tactic' being used all the time (and if I was wrong about it with regards to you in this specific case I apologies but my wider point remains none the less). The tactic of taking something that the people did in (small) majority vote for and using that fact to claim that they also support something different as well - be that rejecting being in customs union or eea or support for a no deal crash out exit or any number of others things that to me at least are not credibly or certainly a 'majority' psoition.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:and hopefully people who voted to leave on the forum will confirm why they voted leave. I’m very confident.
You do make me smile at times I see no way in which the result of your 'poll' here, whatever it's result would be, would change the arguments I am making. Beyond that I do sometimes wonder where you 'common sense' and understanding of 'human nature' goes to at times. Just imagine for a minute that there is someone here who voted leave, only because they 'hate all foreigners'. Do you think they would post here saying 'I voted leave because I am a racist' or would they perhaps just lie and say 'I voted leave because of issues of sovereignty' when in reality they did so because they are racist ?

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 40 of 308 in Discussion

Post by erol »

turtle wrote:Erol
It does appear that you must think that all leave voters had the same reason for leaving the EU, which I would guess is the subject of Immigration,
Actually my entire argument and point is the exact reverse of what you have understood it to be. My argument is that the chances that all leave voters voted leave because of the same singular reason is to me just not credible at all. I made this argument in response to ETS's claim that all of them voted because of 'sovereignty' (or 97% of them did so if you want to get pernickity) that was inherent in his claim that a majority voted leave because of 'wanting to take back sovereignty'
turtle wrote:You rebuke both ETS and myself for “speaking on behalf of all leave voters” then go on to pontificate and lecture us on how both leave and remain voters actually think ?
If you could show where I have done this I would be most grateful because I have been at pains to try and only speak about 'possible' reasons why people voted as they did and even then only sparsely.
turtle wrote: Is it that hard for you to understand that the leave contingent may have done some homework before they voted and perhaps over the last 10 years (as I have) got that fed up with how the EU works and has become a dictatorship to all 28members as we move forward?
It is not hard for me to understand that such issues are part of the reasons why some voted leave. I personally do not agree that the EU has become a 'dictatorship', given that a country like the RoC with a population of less than 1 million still today retains a unilateral veto on a whole range of areas but that is by the by really.
turtle wrote: Fraulein Merkel and that idiot Verhofstadt have both demanded recently we all abandon sovereignty of our countries and remainers appear to agree with this.
Well personally I am in a extreme minority of opinion not just in the UK but EU wide in that I do not fear or reject the notion of a united states of europe , where the individual members have no more or less sovereignty within it than say Texas has within the USA, out of hand. Certainly for me to support increasing moves towards such a future I would have to also see massive reform within the EU as it exits today but I can see potential futures where by a reformed United States of Europe is a positive beneficial outcome for all those who would live in and under such a system.
turtle wrote: Is it beyond rational thinking that most if not all Leavers have numerous reasons for voting the way they did ?
Not only do I think such is entirely rational, it is exactly the very point I have been trying to make repeatedly over however many posts now in the face of ETS assertion that 'sovereignty' is the singular reason all 17.4 million who voted leave did so (or 97% of them).
turtle wrote: We all know that there is lots wrong with the EU (or at least some of us do) and there was an argument of staying in and fighting to change it from within,...I actually agreed with that at the time until the UK was humiliated again when Cameron had his ass slapped and was sent packing so I think we all know that reform of the dictatorship is highly unlikely, they would see it crumble and fall first.
I do indeed think there are many things wrong with the EU. However for me the response to Cameron's demand for 'concessions' motivated in timing and manner that were imo nothing to do with a serious attempt to reform the EU for the benefit of all members of it and everything to do with trying to gamble to secure a majority and prime minister-ship for himself, do not for me indicate that reform within the EU is impossible.
If for the last 40 years the UK had been consistently arguing for EU reform to befit all members equally in terms of things like greater transparency and democratic legitimacy only to be slapped down every time, then I , like you, may well be of the opinion that reform from within the EU is a vain and unacheivable dream. However this is not my perception of how the UK has behaved during it's membership in the last 40 years.
turtle wrote:As for having a seat at the table well the last 2 years has proved the EU have no intention of letting us have a say, this parting is going to hurt the EU very badly with their trade with the UK but they simply do not care,,,couldn’t give a toss.
I think the EU do care about economic damage to themselves but I think they also naturally worry even more about the ongoing existence of the EU project as a whole. This is not helped by those on the extreme leave side of things that not only openly talk about wanting to leave the EU but talk about wanting such to be the very trigger to the collapse of the EU entirely.
turtle wrote:It seriously worries me that the last 2 public engagements old Drunker has attended has resulted him in being carried out of the room drunk as a skunk and the last one he went to an important meeting with odd shoes on one brown and one black....I ask all remainers in all honesty is this the kind of leader you wish to control your lives....seriously ?
Sorry too personal for me.

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 41 of 308 in Discussion

Post by erol »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote: Erol if we were playing poker and you offered me an all in option with us both playing blind I'd take it so it's back on you.
Just to let you know, I don't bluff I'll always shoot a hostage.
And if we had both started with say 5k a piece and you were down to 500 and I was up to 9.5k and offered you a mutual blind round , would you still take it ? In any case my analogy was really we have have to commit to going 'all in' blind but the other party did not, a scenario I am sure you would not consent to.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:Need to sort a game of poker out my man.
Sure though I am not stupid enough to play poker with you for money Send me a pm if you like , we could play on that link I posted before, either in a private table or a public one, though you would need to start with just 100 chips (I currently have eeked my way to 10,000 so far).

turtle
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 865
Joined: Sun 25 Nov 2012 10:44 am

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 42 of 308 in Discussion

Post by turtle »

Sorry too personal for me.
Hahaha... Personal, but true.... but hey why let the truth get in the way of your ramblings.

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 43 of 308 in Discussion

Post by erol »

So for what is worth here is my opinion of how we (UK) could move forward now, though not as though expressing such will make any difference.

1. Unilaterally revoke article 50, as it increasingly seems we can legally do.

2. Hold a referendum on should the UK stay in or out of the EU. However if you think we already did then , then I will concede this step can be ignored.

3. If the result is leave or we just take the 2016 result, then have a referendum on should the UK stay in the EEA after leaving the EU or not.

4. If the result of 3 is 'no we should not', then have a referendum on 'should the UK stay in some form of customs union with the the EU or not'.

5. Then go to the EU with a clear mandate as to what the UK people want and request negotiations. If the EU says it will not negotiate unless we trigger article 50 again, refuse and make it clear we will remain as reluctant and disruptive members within the EU until such time as they show willingness to negotiate before we trigger article 50. No bluff, show this in practice for as long as necessary until the EU relent.

6. Negotiate in genuine good faith to achieve a means of meeting the will of the UK people as expressed in the referenda in a way that is also compatible with the valid needs of the EU. If the EU plays hard ball, just go back to 'ok we will remain as reluctant and disruptive members. This step however will only work if we are 'fair' ourselves in terms of our expectations and demands. Repeat until a deal is reached.

7. Once a proposed deal is reached , take that back to the people to ratify (can be referendum or can just be parliamentary majority). If it is rejected , go back and renegotiate and repeat until a deal that is ratified is passed by Parliament or people majority.

8. Trigger article 50 and the day after implement the agreed deal.

Job done.

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 44 of 308 in Discussion

Post by erol »

turtle wrote: Diminishing trade with the EU
And all those hideous rules more than 50,000
Bananas in small bunches...Stupid
Vacuum cleaners, Kettles, Hair driers...What,s that all about ?
For me all these things are part and parcel of government, be they a sovereign UK one or EU one, it is no different. It is part and parcel of government for example that it is necessary to have 'definitions' and these will always have 'unavoidable silliness' in them. This is nothing unique to the EU. The whole is a Jaffa Cake a cake or a biscuit definition for example was a purely 'national' piece of 'unavoidable silliness'. Thus I am not convinced that they are down to being in the EU or not. In or out there will be a need for government to make 'definitions' be it about what constitutes a 'class one' banana or not, or if a jafa cake is a cake or a biscuit and countless other silliness's. Same with 'government producing rules' - that is what government does and actually what they are paid to do, in or out of the EU. Same with vacuum cleaners and the need for government to certify such as safe to use and to set limits on power usage. Any UK maker of vacuum cleaners who wants to sell to EU members will have to follow EU rules regardless of if the UK is in or out of the EU. Sure outside the EU we would be free to have different 'regulations' and certification processes for things like vacuum cleaners that were to be sold inside the UK along with all the extra cost that would entail for makers and buyers of such but to me that is hardly a defining issue of 'loss sovereignty' though maybe for others it is, I do not know. In any case even outside the EU we will still have to have (I hope) some kind of national agency that certifies such things as safe to use as well as potential (national) regulatory control of things like power use limits. These things, despite how some sections of the press have relentlessly portrayed them for decades now are not imo so much the consequences of the EU but a consequence of 'Government', which in some cases happens to be the EU but in it's absence would be some other form of Government anyway.

turtle
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 865
Joined: Sun 25 Nov 2012 10:44 am

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 45 of 308 in Discussion

Post by turtle »

erol wrote:So for what is worth here is my opinion of how we (UK) could move forward now, though not as though expressing such will make any difference.

1. Unilaterally revoke article 50, as it increasingly seems we can legally do.

2. Hold a referendum on should the UK stay in or out of the EU. However if you think we already did then , then I will concede this step can be ignored.

3. If the result is leave or we just take the 2016 result, then have a referendum on should the UK stay in the EEA after leaving the EU or not.

4. If the result of 3 is 'no we should not', then have a referendum on 'should the UK stay in some form of customs union with the the EU or not'.

5. Then go to the EU with a clear mandate as to what the UK people want and request negotiations. If the EU says it will not negotiate unless we trigger article 50 again, refuse and make it clear we will remain as reluctant and disruptive members within the EU until such time as they show willingness to negotiate before we trigger article 50. No bluff, show this in practice for as long as necessary until the EU relent.


6. Negotiate in genuine good faith to achieve a means of meeting the will of the UK people as expressed in the referenda in a way that is also compatible with the valid needs of the EU. If the EU plays hard ball, just go back to 'ok we will remain as reluctant and disruptive members. This step however will only work if we are 'fair' ourselves in terms of our expectations and demands. Repeat until a deal is reached.

7. Once a proposed deal is reached , take that back to the people to ratify (can be referendum or can just be parliamentary majority). If it is rejected , go back and renegotiate and repeat until a deal that is ratified is passed by Parliament or people majority.

8. Trigger article 50 and the day after implement the agreed deal.

Job done.
I think an appointment needs to be made with your therapist ?....if you think the EU would buy this then you need to make that appointment sooner rather than later.

turtle
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 865
Joined: Sun 25 Nov 2012 10:44 am

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 46 of 308 in Discussion

Post by turtle »

erol wrote:
turtle wrote: Diminishing trade with the EU
And all those hideous rules more than 50,000
Bananas in small bunches...Stupid
Vacuum cleaners, Kettles, Hair driers...What,s that all about ?
For me all these things are part and parcel of government, be they a sovereign UK one or EU one, it is no different. It is part and parcel of government for example that it is necessary to have 'definitions' and these will always have 'unavoidable silliness' in them. This is nothing unique to the EU. The whole is a Jaffa Cake a cake or a biscuit definition for example was a purely 'national' piece of 'unavoidable silliness'. Thus I am not convinced that they are down to being in the EU or not. In or out there will be a need for government to make 'definitions' be it about what constitutes a 'class one' banana or not, or if a jafa cake is a cake or a biscuit and countless other silliness's. Same with 'government producing rules' - that is what government does and actually what they are paid to do, in or out of the EU. Same with vacuum cleaners and the need for government to certify such as safe to use and to set limits on power usage. Any UK maker of vacuum cleaners who wants to sell to EU members will have to follow EU rules regardless of if the UK is in or out of the EU. Sure outside the EU we would be free to have different 'regulations' and certification processes for things like vacuum cleaners that were to be sold inside the UK along with all the extra cost that would entail for makers and buyers of such but to me that is hardly a defining issue of 'loss sovereignty' though maybe for others it is, I do not know. In any case even outside the EU we will still have to have (I hope) some kind of national agency that certifies such things as safe to use as well as potential (national) regulatory control of things like power use limits. These things, despite how some sections of the press have relentlessly portrayed them for decades now are not imo so much the consequences of the EU but a consequence of 'Government', which in some cases happens to be the EU but in it's absence would be some other form of Government anyway.
You really do talk some rubbish Erol.....

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 47 of 308 in Discussion

Post by erol »

turtle wrote: I think an appointment needs to be made with your therapist ?....if you think the EU would buy this then you need to make that appointment sooner rather than later.
The whole point is that the EU would have no say in if they accepted it or not (if we can legally unilaterally withdraw article 50). To me it seems pretty clear that the 'threat' that we will remain as disruptive members if the EU refuse to negotiate or negotiate unfairly is a much better one than 'we will leave without any deal' if they do not do so. Nor is it without proven successful precedent (what Greece did with regards to Cyprus EU entry).

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 48 of 308 in Discussion

Post by erol »

turtle wrote:You really do talk some rubbish Erol.....
Thanks. If the whole 'is a Jafa Cake a cake or biscuit' thing had been caused by the EU rather than national government, I have little doubt that you and the sections of the press I mentioned before would today be trumping it as yet another example of 'EU madness', yet this happened at a national level and was nothing to do with EU regulations. So you may think it is rubbish for me to contemplate how much of the things that are attributed to 'EU madness' are in fact really just a reflection of the inevitable 'madness' of government of any and all kinds but I am afraid I do not think contemplating such is 'rubbish'.

turtle
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 865
Joined: Sun 25 Nov 2012 10:44 am

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 49 of 308 in Discussion

Post by turtle »

erol wrote:
turtle wrote:You really do talk some rubbish Erol.....
Thanks. If the whole 'is a Jafa Cake a cake or biscuit' thing had been caused by the EU rather than national government, I have little doubt that you and the sections of the press I mentioned before would today be trumping it as yet another example of 'EU madness', yet this happened at a national level and was nothing to do with EU regulations. So you may think it is rubbish for me to contemplate how much of the things that are attributed to 'EU madness' are in fact really just a reflection of the inevitable 'madness' of government of any and all kinds but I am afraid I do not think contemplating such is 'rubbish'.


You paint this picture that a lot of madness is created by many governments which may be true but the madness that trumps all others must be the Brussels to Strasbourg fiasco every month at a cost of £150m ...even you couldn't defend that shinanigan........but I'm sure you will.

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: DEAL or NO DEAL on Brexit

  • Quote
  •   Message 50 of 308 in Discussion

Post by erol »

turtle wrote:You paint this picture that a lot of madness is created by many governments which may be true but the madness that trumps all others must be the Brussels to Strasbourg fiasco every month at a cost of £150m ...even you couldn't defend that shinanigan........but I'm sure you will.
No I agree that such is a pointless waste of money and would support any moves to end such. I don't think in the general scale of things that it is the 'biggest' waste of money by Governments but I do agree it is a waste.

Post Reply

Return to “POLITICS - Kibkom North Cyprus Forum”