Don't drag me into your squabbles, col. It's not my fault if you feel other people think you are a racist. It's nothing to do with me. I never said anything. I liked the post because it condemned the rise in racist attacks, which has risen from racists believing the Leave vote gives their views legitimacy. As you are so keen on seeking apologies, I expect one from you.
Not me Ranger, I never ever thought he was accusing you of being racist, I think he was miffed that you wouldn't condemn the attacks.
Looks like Gove is going to stand for the Tory party leadership, which could split Johnson's support amongst MPs (not that high anyway)at least. I would laugh my tits off if Johnson doesn't end up in the two selected by Tory MPs for the party to vote on. But I suspect he will get there, because he is a vote winner and the MPs will be looking to their own chances of re-election as the government rather than selecting someone who would be a good Prime Minister in critical times.
Who ever wins needs to call an election - there is no mandate from the people as to how these negotiations should run. Cameron's previous election was won off the back of staying in the EU, which I'd be more than happy with of course - but somehow doubt will be the new PM's stance.
Who needs enemies when you have friends like this Justice Secretary Michael Gove is to run to be the next Conservative Party leader and UK prime minister. Mr Gove, a prominent figure in the Brexit campaign, had been expected to support Boris Johnson's candidacy. He said he was standing because he had come "to the conclusion that Boris cannot provide the leadership or build the team for the task ahead".
If you tick a "like" Chaz, the strong implication is that you like the whole post, unless you qualify. You could have replied and qualified by saying you did not believe Col was a racist, but you chose not to. So to ask for an apology from Col now is simply bizarre
Okay everyone ...cool down. This is an arguement where different people are putting words into other peoples mouths. All of you are guilty of making over riding assumptions on exactly what other people mean...I am sure some are right, I am equally sure many are wrong. Please just all of you please just step away from the thread for a while....these are very difficult times...name calling isn't going to get us anywhere
Trying to curb free speech again, Chaz? Let me explain it to you. If someone posts that "Stan Bowles is a great bloke, but Chaz is a muppet", and I tick the "like" box, then you aren't going to be best pleased if I say I was just reacting to the Bowles comment, and then demand an apology from you
And again, you're oversimplifying for effect, and trying to provoke more arguments. Still has zero to do with you, however, if Col took offence at something and then chose to drag me into his vitriol for no good reason. He was wrong - something I doubt you're able to appreciate, and something it appears he isn't big enough to admit. I appreciate I'll be waiting a long time for his apology, but I'm still waiting.
I agree Cameron's election win was won on the back of staying in the EU, Tooting, but also on giving the electorate a referendum on the EU, something that Ed Miliband denied voters. The country has voted to come out by 52%, and I would say that the winner of the Tory contest does have the mandate from the people to negotiate us out. It's interesting that we're beginning to see cracks in the EU leaders resolve. The bureaucrats of Brussels who were not voted in by an electorate and are accountable to nobody are taking a hard, legalistic line, led by the unpopular Juncker. The French and the Germans whose leaders have elections coming up, and don't want to upset their farmers and industrialists respectively by making sales to an important customer, the UK, more difficult, are starting to bend on our wish to control our borders. I'm optimistic of a reasonable compromise eventually, where we can control numbers coming in, and still trade tariff free with EU member states
Goidie, when I was watching the news last night every single one of the EU leaders, including Merkel, were shown saying 'no access to single market without freedom of movement'. This is also what they all said during the 'negotiations' pre referendum campaign. They are also united on no negotiation without (article 50) notification, though they do seem to have resigned themselves to waiting for the Tories to sort themselves out for this to happen. Pretty clear that Merkel at least wants this to be an amicable process with a positive result for all, but I see no possibility of bending on freedom of movement. Indeed, a single market, the ultimate aim of which is harmonisation across states, is meaningless without it, it would end up as dysfunctional as the Euro, cementing competitive advantages where they already are. Cameron's argument in his negotiation was that the EU should only be about the market and competition, he lost that argument not with the EU bureaucracy but with the leaders of the 27 other countries. The dirigiste French, whether they are led by Hollande, Sarkozy or even I suspect Le Pen, are fundamentally against letting markets run free without strong direction. The Italians are pretty close to them, and they have both been arguing that the response to Brexit should be accelerated EU integration, especially within the Eurozone. We and the Germans used to act as a balance to this, now it's just the Germans. What source of info do you have that I'm not seeing?
The French finance minister, Michel Sapin has said that there would be no red lines in talks over the single market See the Guardian report: http://www.theguardian.com/politics...he-table-in-brexit-talks-says-french-minister The EU is known for nothing, if not its compromises and fudges. This may well be the start...
