The EU debate - Part III

[steveninaster1]

Cameron failed miserably in his mission to have a few changes. It's what led to the referendum, so it's unlikley we'd be in a position to stop other issues, even if they cropped in a way that would let us or that we realised were happening.

You seem to see the EU as operating in a way that in reality it doesn't.

I think Cameron went the wrong way about it if he wanted changes.

 

[DMD]

Bullshit...

There's nothing more to add. You're spouting fanciful, unsubstantiated, bollocks to try and justify you're own twisted views!..

You must log in or register to see images

 

[Tiddler]

So despite their utterances on the entire subject, not using the words zero immigration would somehow make them advocates of immigration then?

What a ridiculous argument.

The claim made by one of your disciples was that at least those 2 had claimed there should be zero immigration. Is that so hard for you to understand or are you just trying on your usual bollocks of spin & deflect?

Even you must realise what an embarrassment you are at times

 

[DMD]

I think Cameron went the wrong way about it if he wanted changes.

Probably, it certainly didn't work the way he tried it.

What way do you see that he could have approached it that may have worked?

 

[steveninaster1]

Probably, it certainly didn't work the way he tried it.

What way do you see that he could have approached it that may have worked?

Not turning up as a desperate man begging for scraps would've helped.

The EU is what it is because previous leaders signed agreements. He should've waited for our presidency to start and put the whole immigration, free movement and levels of beauocracy control on the table as our agenda.

 

[Tobes]

Cameron failed miserably in his mission to have a few changes. It's what led to the referendum, so it's unlikley we'd be in a position to stop other issues, even if they cropped in a way that would let us or that we realised were happening.

You seem to see the EU as operating in a way that in reality it doesn't.

No not at all.

Cameron wanted a 'deal' for the UK, and came back with a compromise on what he set out looking for.

We have the power of veto, we opted out of the Euro. Any move to genuine federal Europe would have to passed through the democratic channels and we wouldn't have accepted it, and veto'd any attempt to include us in it

 

[Stan]

You're in luck sonny. Uncle stan the snide is here and he has all day to keep an eye on you

You must log in or register to see images

Is that a pic from your secret stash Tiddler?

 

[Tiddler]

Is that a pic from your secret stash Tiddler?

My paddling pool.

 

[The Prime Minister]

No not at all.

Cameron wanted a 'deal' for the UK, and came back with a compromise on what he set out looking for.

We have the power of veto, we opted out of the Euro. Any move to genuine federal Europe would have to passed through the democratic channels and we wouldn't have accepted it, and veto'd any attempt to include us in it

What he got was a joke and not worth the paper it was written on.

 

[Tobes]

The claim made by one of your disciples was that at least those 2 had claimed there should be zero immigration. Is that so hard for you to understand or are you just trying on your usual bollocks of spin & deflect?

Even you must realise what an embarrassment you are at times

Do you think that given the choice Zlatan the White Supremacist and KKKustard would want any immigration?

Kustard has said he'd tolerate small numbers, as long as they were highly skilled, but that's not the same as giving him the choice of none or some. Zlatan wouldn't want any more that dilute the honky majority.

 

[Tobes]

What he got was a joke and not worth the paper it was written on.

Bullshit.

He got an exclusion for the UK for funding Eurozone bailouts

He also got a deal on limiting benefits access for EU migrants.

He also got an exclusion for the UK that for any new EU Treaties, any reference to an ever closer Union - will have a clear caveat that the ever closer Union does not apply to the UK

 

[pieguts]

OK,
I challenge you to find a post where I have made an assumption about what you have said. All the assumptions have been on your part you fool as you stated you did not know why a mention was made to immigration by someone else and I gave an opinion as to why it was the case.

That you continue to repeat yourself without actually taking on board that my comments refer to what someone else said and not you is the most telling point of this charade. It just shows a pathetic level of insecurity tbh that you are arguing with someone who hasn't disagreed with you.

So we're now into personal insults.
I'm currently on my phone, so it's difficult to keep going backwards or forwards.
After my early exchanges with Paul, which seem to have been amicable, you got involved and at some part over the next few posts tried to tell me that I had become embroiled into a immigration discussion whether I realised it or not. I have now spent the last couple of hours telling you that I hadn't, as I was very careful with my initial wording and the comments were deliberate on my part. I'm not sure why this is so difficult to understand. That's the beauty of this type of forum, it's written words, which are clear for all to see.
I claimed (and stand by that claim) that (a) you don't like to be challenged, as was demonstrated in our recent exchanges over driverless vehicle exchanges and (b) you like to have the last word.
If you think I'm not going to respond to you, when you are clearly wrong, then I'm afraid that's not going to happen. I'm not sure how that is showing a pathetic level of insecurity, when all I have tried to do is refute your incorrect assertion.
Over to you...

 

[Tiddler]

Do you think that given the choice Zlatan the White Supremacist and KKKustard would want any immigration?

Kustard has said he'd tolerate small numbers, as long as they were highly skilled, but that's not the same as giving him the choice of none or some. Zlatan wouldn't want any more that dilute the honky majority.

Usual bollocks it is then.

You could have just agreed that they never made the claim instead of spinning yourself into the ground while trying to defend that lying ****er.

 

[steveninaster1]

So we're now into personal insults.
I'm currently on my phone, so it's difficult to keep going backwards or forwards.
After my early exchanges with Paul, which seem to have been amicable, you got involved and at some part over the next few posts tried to tell me that I had become embroiled into a immigration discussion whether I realised it or not. I have now spent the last couple of hours telling you that I hadn't, as I was very careful with my initial wording and the comments were deliberate on my part. I'm not sure why this is so difficult to understand. That's the beauty of this type of forum, it's written words, which are clear for all to see.
I claimed (and stand by that claim) that (a) you don't like to be challenged, as was demonstrated in our recent exchanges over driverless vehicle exchanges and (b) you like to have the last word.
If you think I'm not going to respond to you, when you are clearly wrong, then I'm afraid that's not going to happen. I'm not sure how that is showing a pathetic level of insecurity, when all I have tried to do is refute your incorrect assertion.
Over to you...

I was involved before you tool. You were responding to the video I posted and I was only interested in an amicable discussion until your aggressive response made false claims.
If you want to keep this drivel going on the basis that I made assumptions about you then you keep at it. My initial response was not offensive or aggressive, nor did it make false assumptions, so stop trying to play innocent and give it a rest.

 

[The Prime Minister]

You must log in or register to see images

 

[The Prime Minister]

Bullshit.

He got an exclusion for the UK for funding Eurozone bailouts

He also got a deal on limiting benefits access for EU migrants.

He also got an exclusion for the UK that for any new EU Treaties, any reference to an ever closer Union - will have a clear caveat that the ever closer Union does not apply to the UK

You do realise that the MEPs had to vote on it and they did say they would/could reject it


http://openeurope.org.uk/today/blog...nt-scupper-david-camerons-renegotiation-deal/

 

[Tobes]

Usual bollocks it is then.

You could have just agreed that they never made the claim instead of spinning yourself into the ground while trying to defend that lying ****er.

Only I didn't say they made the claim tiddler, I just reminded you of their views on the subject.

If you'd have bother to read what I posted properly you'd have seen that.....

Ho hum

 

[Tobes]

You do realise that the MEPs had to vote on it and they did say they would reject it

He came back with a finalised deal that took 3 years of negotiation.

 

[pieguts]

I was involved before you tool. You were responding to the video I posted and I was only interested in an amicable discussion until your aggressive response made false claims.
If you want to keep this drivel going on the basis that I made assumptions about you then you keep at it. My initial response was not offensive or aggressive, nor did it make false assumptions, so stop trying to play innocent and give it a rest.

I know you posted the video, but my comment was to Paul. Why you felt the need to add your two bobs worth is still beyond me but you did, it was incorrect, and now you don't seem to able to move on.
Your mask is definitely slipping, with the tool jibes, but if it you need it to somehow continue with the argument, feel free.
Your posts are now staring to portray a petulant child. At no point have I said you were either offensive or agreesive, just incorrect. I have not tried to claim innocence for anything, again another incorrect assumption. I know what and why I said what I said.
I think it's you that needs to give it a rest as your starting to look more and more foolish with every post.

 

[steveninaster1]

I know you posted the video, but my comment was to Paul. Why you felt the need to add your two bobs worth is still beyond me but you did, it was incorrect, and now you don't seem to able to move on.
Your mask is definitely slipping, with the tool jibes, but if it you need it to somehow continue with the argument, feel free.
Your posts are now staring to portray a petulant child. At no point have I said you were either offensive or agreesive, just incorrect. I have not tried to claim innocence for anything, again another incorrect assumption. I know what and why I said what I said.
I think it's you that needs to give it a rest as your starting to look more and more foolish with every post.

It's a forum, if you don't like people adding their ha'penny them you are in the wrong place. Find yourself a private chat room dear fellow.