Article 50/Brexit Negotiations

[The perfect fumble]

As we pay in a lot more than comes to the UK is it not simple logic that any money that farmers and scientists receive from the UK does not need to face any shortfall?

We could just make those payments direct – or we could decide to invest ALL of the money elsewhere in the UK based on what WE rather than the EU determine to be our priorities.

Again, you're peddling the delusion that we take back our money, spend it as we wish and our departure from the EU will not dent our GDP as we carry on with the same growth trajectory or better.

This is not just wrong, it is a pernicious lie. Our GDP will be adversely affected by Brexit and the downside will be greater than any upside we make by retaining our EU contribution, certainly in the short to medium term.

If you're definition of a good deal is the status quo PLUS, then you're "living in another galaxy". Let us assume for the sake of argument that a land of milk and honey awaits us after Brexit, that land is years away, but the downsides are more immediate, hence May's "pain".

The UK will not benefit in the short to medium term by leaving the EU, our country will not be "rewarded" with a better deal for leaving than she enjoyed as a member, this is gobsmackingly obvious, all 27 EU countries agree on this. What club operates where non members get privileges akin to or greater than members?

So we are going to take a hit in the short to medium term, that is simply beyond dispute. There is no good deal to be had, defined as better than the one we have now, there is only a least worst deal and then a long hard slog to your promised land, if we are incredibly lucky.

 

[Vic]

I see one of the positives of leaving the EU is that we can stop subsidies to farmers. They get fortunes for doing nothing. We don't need them either, imports are cheaper.

Wow. Half a million jobs gone, just like that.

 

[The perfect fumble]

I see one of the positives of leaving the EU is that we can stop subsidies to farmers. They get fortunes for doing nothing. We don't need them either, imports are cheaper.

If you're happy to devastate the rural economy, with massive unemployment, deserted towns and villages and leave what people are left to be custodians of the countryside then have at it.

 

[The perfect fumble]

No - I think that as I highlighted Helmut's use of the word 'kidnapper' it is obvious that Stockholm Syndrome were clearly the correct words to use. I think everyone else on the thread would have understood that linkage.

Saboteurs would not actually make any sense when responding to a post and highlighting 'kidnapper'

Another day - another TPF distraction post with a silly GIF that offers no substance

Perhaps the word you're looking for is quisling.

 

[stonerblue]

Wow. Half a million jobs gone, just like that.

Yeah, but we get cheap sprouts innit..

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Yeah, but we get cheap sprouts innit..

You're looking for a reply about Brussels, aren't you?

 

[stonerblue]

You're looking for a reply about Brussels, aren't you?

bUSTED

 

[mcfc1632]

Perhaps the word you're looking for is quisling.

Let's just test a theory that I have been putting out on this thread recently.

That theory is that you generally do not post anything of substance but largely stalk the thread seeking opportunities to inundate it/us with your cheap and often snide posts to distract from the topic of the thread and prevent those that do not hold the same views as you from having worthwhile discussion.

You often do so by taking the posts of others out of context and twisting their words to mean something that they clearly did not in what must be some attempt to undermine the information that was being given.

I do not know why you do this, it feels that you have a need to feed some desire to project that your views and opinions are all-knowing/superior Who knows? - maybe it is just that you are so offended by what took place on 23/06 you simply cannot stand to see anything posted that would support or speak positively about the UK leaving the EU.

 

[mcfc1632]

So let's test that theory of mine with this latest little campaign of yours:

Helmut posts: “Short answer - yes. We need immigrants. We don't need to be part of a weird club that behaves like a kidnapper.”

I highlight the word Kidnapper in my response to be clear that this is word that I am relating to and I respond:

“Well said - trouble is, IMO, a number on here have Stockholm syndrome and fight the EU's fight”

So does anybody have any problem with understanding my use of Stockholm Syndrome in the context of where someone has mentioned an organisation behaving like a kidnapper – Helmut did you understand what I was meaning? I doubt anyone had a problem, but to help a definition is:

“...People suffering from Stockholm syndrome come to identify with and even care for their captors in a desperate, usually unconscious act of self-preservation. It occurs in the most psychologically traumatic situations, often hostage situations or kidnappings, and its effects usually do not end when the crisis ends. In the most classic cases, victims continue to defend and care about their captors even after they escape captivity. Symptoms of Stockholm syndrome have also been identified in the slave/master relationship, in battered-spouse cases and in members of destructive cults.”

So given that Helmut mentioned kidnapper, I am suggesting that some on here and elsewhere have come to “...care for their captors in a desperate, usually unconscious act of.............”

So it is clear that I am suggesting that there is a sense, IMO, that a some of the more ardent EU acolytes have become institutionalised – do you need the definition of that?

So then you reply with one of your cheap posts with the Daily Mail headline on 'Saboteurs '– why? It is clear there was no difficulty in understanding my meaning. So it is logical to consider that you are simply twisting my meaning away from people acting in a‘....usually unconscious....’ manner – to reflect me saying something more insulting.

I then post calmly explaining the linkage between kidnapping and Stockholm Syndrome, but you go much further and suggest the word I am wanting to use is ‘quisling’. This is defined as “..a traitor who collaborates...” so again you attempt to twist my words to mean something that they did not – seeking to suggest that I am being very insulting which I was not.

So, as for my theory that you often take the posts of others deliberately out of context and twist their words to mean something that they clearly did not – a good call I think.

 

[Vic]

Ridiculous stuff. We can't call remainers racist or thick but you think half the population is suffering from Stockholm syndrome.

 

[mcfc1632]

Ridiculous stuff. We can't call remainers racist or thick but you think half the population is suffering from Stockholm syndrome.

Beware - doing a Fumble............. Perhaps it is catching?

How does '....some on here..........' suddenly become half the population of the UK??

Perhaps we need to have a term for people taking things deliberately out of context / exaggerating etc. I wonder if 'Fumble syndrome' is trademarked?

 

[smudgedj]

Ridiculous stuff. We can't call remainers racist or thick but you think half the population is suffering from Stockholm syndrome.

Lol You've just proved his point.

 

[bonespost]

 

[bluethrunthru]

I know politicians will say anything to get elected but fuck me this two faced slippery cow takes the biscuit

 

[mcfc1632]

Was it some secret that she was on the Remain side of the debate prior to the 23/06? I personally knew that, but did not regard it as me having 'insider information'.

Even better would be to get up the clips of Amber Rudd as she attacks Boris in the debate - real vitriol and she is now Home Secretary and will be responsible for controlling our borders post-Brexit

Thankfully it seems that some prominent pro-Remain supporters have found it within themselves to 'move on'. They seem to have found the personal strength of character to recognise that there has been a major democratic exercise with a clear outcome and are acting to give effect to the decision.

Perhaps there are lessons for some on here?

 

[blueish swede]

So let's test that theory of mine with this latest little campaign of yours:

Helmut posts: “Short answer - yes. We need immigrants. We don't need to be part of a weird club that behaves like a kidnapper.”

I highlight the word Kidnapper in my response to be clear that this is word that I am relating to and I respond:

“Well said - trouble is, IMO, a number on here have Stockholm syndrome and fight the EU's fight”

So does anybody have any problem with understanding my use of Stockholm Syndrome in the context of where someone has mentioned an organisation behaving like a kidnapper – Helmut did you understand what I was meaning? I doubt anyone had a problem, but to help a definition is:

“...People suffering from Stockholm syndrome come to identify with and even care for their captors in a desperate, usually unconscious act of self-preservation. It occurs in the most psychologically traumatic situations, often hostage situations or kidnappings, and its effects usually do not end when the crisis ends. In the most classic cases, victims continue to defend and care about their captors even after they escape captivity. Symptoms of Stockholm syndrome have also been identified in the slave/master relationship, in battered-spouse cases and in members of destructive cults.”

So given that Helmut mentioned kidnapper, I am suggesting that some on here and elsewhere have come to “...care for their captors in a desperate, usually unconscious act of.............”

So it is clear that I am suggesting that there is a sense, IMO, that a some of the more ardent EU acolytes have become institutionalised – do you need the definition of that?

So then you reply with one of your cheap posts with the Daily Mail headline on 'Saboteurs '– why? It is clear there was no difficulty in understanding my meaning. So it is logical to consider that you are simply twisting my meaning away from people acting in a‘....usually unconscious....’ manner – to reflect me saying something more insulting.

I then post calmly explaining the linkage between kidnapping and Stockholm Syndrome, but you go much further and suggest the word I am wanting to use is ‘quisling’. This is defined as “..a traitor who collaborates...” so again you attempt to twist my words to mean something that they did not – seeking to suggest that I am being very insulting which I was not.

So, as for my theory that you often take the posts of others deliberately out of context and twist their words to mean something that they clearly did not – a good call I think.

I have a problem with it because they weren't kidnapped, they were held hostage.

You remind me a lot of Steven Fry - know a little bit about a lot, enough to impress the uneducated for a brief period between adverts, but don't really know enough to form a lucid argument about anything

 

[The perfect fumble]

Let's just test a theory that I have been putting out on this thread recently.

That theory is that you generally do not post anything of substance but largely stalk the thread seeking opportunities to inundate it/us with your cheap and often snide posts to distract from the topic of the thread and prevent those that do not hold the same views as you from having worthwhile discussion.

You often do so by taking the posts of others out of context and twisting their words to mean something that they clearly did not in what must be some attempt to undermine the information that was being given.

I do not know why you do this, it feels that you have a need to feed some desire to project that your views and opinions are all-knowing/superior Who knows? - maybe it is just that you are so offended by what took place on 23/06 you simply cannot stand to see anything posted that would support or speak positively about the UK leaving the EU.

You ignore everything of substance I post, so there's very little point in engaging with you in any meaningful way.

You can't come to terms with the fact there is no compelling economic argument for Brexit. The argument in its favour is solely a nationalist one, but you feel uncomfortable with that, so you have to squeeze it out through your cheeks in tiny turds of little englander prejudice.

You are simply a rag bag of reactionary nonsense, extolling the virtues of democracy in one sentence and wanking to iron lady, hard man rhetoric the next. You hold your fellow Brits in contempt while hailing their mythical virtues. You are like a lot of petty Tories, you love your country but loathe the people in it.

 

[mcfc1632]

I have a problem with it because they weren't kidnapped, they were held hostage.

You remind me a lot of Steven Fry - know a little bit about a lot, enough to impress the uneducated for a brief period between adverts, but don't really know enough to form a lucid argument about anything

Oh for goodness sake - you guys are so desperate to find fault that you embarrass yourselves through the manner in which you post without thinking.

I assume that the point that you are trying to be clever by making is the origin of Stockholm Syndrome? Yes we all know about the hostage situation at the bank - but as you will see from the definition that I gave - that label has been used since that incident in the 70's to describe many other such situations - including kidnappings - do you remember the Patty Hearst kidnapping shortly after the Stockholm incident??

If you are going to make such scathing comments I suggest that you would be better to think before typing as it might prevent embarrassment.

Now as for the manner in which you cut me to the quick with your character assassination:

“You remind me a lot of Steven Fry - know a little bit about a lot, enough to impress the uneducated for a brief period between adverts, but don't really know enough to form a lucid argument about anything”

As you obviously feel the need to comment on others being ‘uneducated’ and that you were clearly not impressed – then you must consider yourself to be impressively educated??

Sounds a bit like Fumble Syndrome.

You got any mirrors in your house? - Is it made of glass and have you got a rockery? – perhaps you ought to firstly aspire to the Stephen Fry level

 

[mcfc1632]

You ignore everything of substance I post, so there's very little point in engaging with you in any meaningful way.

You can't come to terms with the fact there is no compelling economic argument for Brexit. The argument in its favour is solely a nationalist one, but you feel uncomfortable with that, so you have to squeeze it out through your cheeks in tiny turds of little englander prejudice.

You are simply a rag bag of reactionary nonsense, extolling the virtues of democracy in one sentence and wanking to iron lady, hard man rhetoric the next. You hold your fellow Brits in contempt while hailing their mythical virtues. You are like a lot of petty Tories, you love your country but loathe the people in it.

You been drinking? What a load of incoherent nonsense - was it in an attempt to insult?

In a galaxy somewhere it might indeed be devastating – not this one.

I will ignore the desperate childishness but with regard to your first line - that you think that I ignore all that you post of substance. Well I would not wish to do that and certainly have not done so knowingly – I must have just missed them.

Perhaps next time you do post substance try starting the post with some label to identify it – “Substance alert’ or something that will make it obvious.

 

[BigJoe#1]

Good for you Theresa May if this is true!

http://www.westmonster.com/nuclear-option-to-immediately-end-eu-budget-contributions/

The government have been drawing up a ‘nuclear option’ which would see Britain immediately end budget contributions, should Brexit negotiations break down.

The plan would be disastrous for the EU’s spending plans, given the fact that the UK is the second biggest contributor to the pot, and would see the bloc losing hundreds of millions every week.

A source told The Sun: “Ceasing our contributions is not a threat No. 10 want to make yet, but it has certainly been discussed”.

The news comes as Theresa May accused EU leaders of trying to influence the election, saying that a slew of hostile briefings from senior EU officials “have been deliberately timed to affect the result of the General Election”.

The news will please Brexiteers who have long said we should walk away first, and then negotiate with the EU once the stakes are well and truly raised.

Brussels has milked the UK cash cow for long enough!