British Indy: What Happens Now?

I suspect you're asking the wrong questions.
lets try these.
why did many of those 17mill think the EU are responsible for uncontrolled immigration and measures are not in place to remove them?
why did many of those 17mill think the EU are responsible for their stagnating wages?
why did many of those 17mill think the EU create their laws where even the mighty loz got his arse handed to him in a plate.
why did many of those 17mill think that we are not the creators of all EU policy.
why do many of those 17mill think things are gonna be better for them when they are handing back full control to those that care not a jot for them.
let me give you a wee clue
Murdoch, Redmond, Johnson bros.

 

oooo please miss can I play can I play?

(1) because enough knew when the eu sought to increase their footprint and took in 10 new ex eastern countries, only 3 eu countries signed up initially to the movement of those new countries within the eu, (i covered this a few pages ago).

Blair said at the time we expected 6-13 thousand. 3 million europeans later. We were not in shengen but had signed other movement agreements that allowed the U.K. to have an open door

(2) The eu's whole purpose is to remove countries as organisations and boundaries from countries to allow the eu to become a country and multinationals to make shitloads. If you were a lorry driver on £25 an hour and suddenly your company starts using an employment agency where polish or any other eu member starts offering drivers at £10 and hour, who benefits? I don't blame the migrant, if they were on £4 an hour at home and someone is offering £10 an hour, you would consider moving but there is not doubt whatsoever, the eu's expansion is not for the greater good but more for the multinational business's good and the beaurocrats closer wish to country europe

(3) laws, how can remainers say we have hardly any laws from the eu and then say we are so intertwinned with the eu it is almost impossible to leave? laws are not just those in a court case, there are trade, medical etc etc

(4) creators of eu policy, i could use you as an example fin, you admit to voting for other parties before the brainwashing of the snp , the U.K. signed up to a balanced eu, in later years it has moved to a federalist orgnisation, the eu would not change so we decided good luck but not for us

(5) I think they know they will have more control in the U.K. as shown recently, even the head honcho can be removed by the people, not something you can do in the eu, something a "more democratic snp" seems to think is a bonus, suckers

Now as you have done what you always do, refuse to answer the questions then divert with others, can you answer mine, ta

 

I didn't include the amount of your ex's exi, My calculator only works upto a certian number

 

Unless he delivers a clean break, there will be brexit party mp's in parliament. I doubt those will turncoat to the lib dems

 

the vote was three and a half years ago. I never heard anybody complaining then.

yip, blair. part of the elite you will be giving back control to. being out the EU wont stop the bull.

will the multinationals have more or less of a leaver to use against an isolated UK? why would any country's residents allow their gov to sign up to all that?

its not impossible to leave the EU, far from it. the UK has a particular set of circumstances that make it more complicated. the GFA and the fact that there are 4 countries and two signatories to the act of union. 2voted remain. one of those two contribute far more than they get out. yor leades know you will be broke without dragging the other along. and its looking increasing unlikely they will be able to do that.

yip, I supported, but not voted for other partys. I didn't vote because I couldn't afford to. (poll tax). I turned to the SNP during the reff period. when forced to look, I could see how much things had improved under the stewardship. despite austerity. I could see how much difference between our and your services where being run and protected. I could see the difference in the messages and vision your gov where offering compared to the SNP's. govs hate reffs. people stop voting the same way as there fathers, and there fathers father and outside party lines.

yip, only to be replaced by another.

I would answer them. but its the same ol debunked shit murduch, Redmond and the johnsons bros have been repeating for 10years.

 

as the support for indi has only grown over the last 10years to the point its only ever seen as inevitable. with 38% of the UK's resources. I wonder how much of this has formed tory/kipper English nationalist opinion in those Smokey back rooms?

 

So you don't read links that dispute your snp conversion, refuse to see independent papers links and reports unless they are pro snp, refuse to accept the scottish peoples vote to stay in the uk and refuse to accept a uk wide vote you willingly took part in

there is certianly some debunked shit in there, it seems however, the snp have the biggest anti democracy tractors to shed it across the land

 

knowing the make up of, and being a supporter of indi, straight off the bat I'v got something in common with pro leave and remain. from left to right, which means, I am much more likely to have a listen to what they are saying.
v,little comes even close to the pish your pedalling. most pro indi/leave voters focus on absolute independence. I believe we have the resources to achieve this. at least in the short to mid term. and would still have voted for it. after that, any decision taken would of been ours to take.
I don't and have never said the EU is the be all and end all. my remain vote was taken with the consideration of still being part of the UK, I don't trust UK Govs, the rise of farage and his vision for the UK. the bigger issues that where starting to immerge, climate change, trump, Russia, other future competitors. you know, the immerging low pay economies.
the SNP did accept the 2014 result. and the people sent 56MP's to hold the people who made the promises to account. they also accepted the 2016 result as did the people, because we where to lead the UK. not choose to leave it.
despite not running on indi in 2017 the people chose to return 60% of the seats. so if anybody is ignoring the 2016 vote, its the people. lets see how many seats they return putting indi front and center. who will you blame then, the party, or the people?

 

In amongst your usual jibber jabber I found one point of worth

But lets look at the snp's ACTUAL actions

In 2014 after decades teeth grinding and spitting feathers reminiscent of the blue and white one, no not gibson, the scottish voices were heard after the snp shouting for decades " The scottish voices must be heard and must be respected"

So a Scottish specific referendum was set and away you go. But the snpee government put in a caveat get out of jail card in case it didn't go their own way. Sure enough, the Scottish peoples voices were heard and for a generation and they voted to stay within the U.K.

However, the snpee and their chinny chin chin were not happy as the Scottish people said the wrong thing, how dare they, the brit nats fault, it must be, no sane Scott would go against the snpee. So invoking the get out of jail free card, the snpee government envoked, the scots spoke, we respect how they spoke, but they spoke english instead of jibber jabber and so we want a second referendum

Now in truth, had the scots voice been leave the u.k., all would have respected that and I'm pretty sure it would have happened. So what is the difference between the two versions? The snpee government lost so wants another go because the scottish voices got it wrong

We move onto the brexit vote, all sides knew in advance it was a vote that would be acted upon and was a generational vote. ALL sides knew this was a nationwide vote and NOT a individual nation vote and over 33.5 million voted knowing on one side would give the future direction..the nation voted and the future direction was to leave and guess what

Up popped the snpee governmentlike one of ken dodds didee men, talking about suddenly it was a by nation vote and because of that they were not accepting it (despite 38% of scots voters wanting to leave too) Hurrumph the little fat fellow in parliament we will not be taken out against our will ! err fella me lad, it was a nationwide vote, you knew this before anyone voted

Came back the mumbled sheepish excuse, not in scotland it wasn't, the people of Scotlands votes need to be respected. So not for the first time, the snpee government sought to twist the result of a peoples vote because democracy only works when it is their version so guess what?

Now in truth, everyone knew in advance this was a U.K. wide vote., all said they would have respected that . So what is the difference between the two versions? The snpee government lost so wants another go because the peoples votes got it wrong again and that wasn't the vote the snpee would accept or would allow

So what we've got here is, a failure to communicate. Both peoples votes were clear what area of the U.K. they referred too, were all clear to both sides they would be acted upon and both votes did not give the snpee government the vote/decision they wanted so they have fought tooth and nail to ensure democracy is only when the snpee wins the vote, not the people, but the snpee

The snpee claim to want democracy, by ACTIONS and not words, the last thing they want is democracy or the scottish people voting against them

So in order to aid democracy for Scotland and the people of Scotland, at the next election the people of Scotland will have, the snpee are intent in clearing up any allegation they are not anti democratic and will respect the next vote.

They will be putting crosses in all the snpee boxes on the ballot papers before they are sent out, mugabe styleee . Thus ensuring for the first time in 5 years and two independence votes, the snpee will finally agree an indi vote result

 

that's not your writing. who did you copy it from? tho to be fair its in the same angry tone. maybe it is yours and I am just getting under your skin. who knows, even less care.

there was no SNP caveat in 2014, however there was a series of 11th hour, knee jerk reactions from Con/Lab/lib when the polling made 54% yes. then, we voted to stay in the UK.
what, as a voter do you think should be respected? the result, or the promises made to secure the result? can you see why politicians in general are not trusted? if its the former do you see the similarity in the continuing Brexit farce?

they didn't say the wrong thing. they got the population from the high 20s to 54% before better together said the wrong thing and made promises they couldn't keep.

they didn't get it wrong as such, nobody knew, or believed when the yes campaign said we where heading for Brexit and bojo. we are where we are. we have the right to promote a different future. or are you saying because you voted for Brexit, there is no other way and infact the UK is now a dictatorship?.
.
I didn't get any further with your post. way to angry. but I have listed to the leavers from my side of the argument. mostly because they are way more positive in their outlook. chill. yer gonna bust a vessel man.

 

Point of order here

Light is a electromagnetic wave and what we see the effect of that energy hitting objects and manifesting itself as luminance

No sees light

 

Interesting article

On the radio the other day a chap from NI was on making the following point

That the referendum was not a U.K. referendum but an English referendum. He argued that it was all about the Tory party who have no strength in any of the smaller nations and it was a battle for control of the tory party, which the ERG group have now won.

The discussion was centred on how culpable was David Cameron for the mess. He went into say that Cameron was lazy and arrogant having already won two refereda and that the vote to leave should have been set up if there was a majority in all four nations. Or in other words he should have stacked the deck, even if was only allowing 16-17 year olds and EU Citizens to vote.

 

I am not sure how you think leaving the EU will protect U.K. based truck drivers. If a U.K. company wants to use a Polish company post Brexit, they still can.

There was a business owner in the radio the other day who was saying that the DTI had told him to open a business in the Netherlands. His company designed, installed and maintained gym equipment. Since we are likely to lose freedom of movement his only choice as to lay off most of his staff(85% of his business is in the EU) and employ EU citizens to do the work on the continent. Accordingly, his companies profits will be declared in Netherlands and tax paid there. He only expects to retain admin function in the U.K.

He also commented that Other business people he had spoken to with similar business structures have been advised the same by the DTI

 

Care to explain why the Shetland Islands have one of the highest rates of fuel poverty in the U.K. whilst it has all the oil coming ashore at Sullem Voe

 

yip, that's pretty much the prevailing attitude. if it wasn't about England, thats exactly what he should of done, but in retrospect, i'm more inclined to believe its a tory party/english thing. i'm more inclined now to believe what Pete mentioned a few times re Camaron doing a good job of holding the party together and working hard to keep the ERG out the picture and out the headlines.