Ffs. Twisting the truth and putting words in people’s mouths is your modus operandi.
No. I have a problem with liars and people who twist the truth to try and make a point.
But you didn't call it a scam. It took long enough for you to call it annoying. You then made out that it is OK as no law was broke constantly. And the only reason for This is that there are rules and regulations that cover it but no laws cover it.I am not going to research that. I know what I said, and yes it is annoying. I am not rabid, so when I say annoying, a sham and a scam that is as hard as you will get.
Questioning what you say is putting words into your mouth? If you were being truthful there would be no words put into your mouth. That is the comment that you and a couple others use when caught out yet again.Ffs. Twisting the truth and putting words in people’s mouths is your modus operandi.
Would you like to point out where I have blamed them?
This is typical of those on here desperate for us to stay in the EU. I explained clearly my thoughts. And have countless times. But you continue to try and twist everything I say.
Well done.
And as I have constantly asked you has the population boom we have had for the last 20 years made any difference to homeless numbers?You've repeatably tried to portray migration (probably EU migration) as a key factor in people being homeless in the UK.
I have't twisted anything that you've said, it's all stuff that you've come out with over the years.
But you didn't call it a scam. It took long enough for you to call it annoying. You then made out that it is OK as no law was broke constantly. And the only reason for This is that there are rules and regulations that cover it but no laws cover it.
If you say yes you are in agreement with me. If you say no then you are lying.
lol, think I've come into contact with at least 8 of the 14.
Of course it can.Not true as usual. I didn’t say it was ok. I said it was a scam and annoying. I said it cannot be reversed as it was not illegal.
Why is it?This is why it's pointless even trying to have a proper discussion with you.
They're not, these are issues the British government has not attempted to address instead being ridiculously cavalier arrogant Tory wankers.So we should stay in the EU because they are trying to force us to stay in?
You are so funny.Meanwhile back in the real world Nissan becomes latest manufacturer to warn against hard Brexit
So why is it that several times they have said that the terms put forward are not good enough....But it isn't too late to stay in and nothing would be held against us?They're not, these are issues the British government has not attempted to address instead being ridiculously cavalier arrogant Tory wankers.
You are so funny.
Only an idiot couldn't see problems arising with no deal. And that is all over the EU.
But for some reason you only concentrate on one side. And ignore who it is who has the say if there is a deal or not.
So why is it that several times they have said that the terms put forward are not good enough....But it isn't too late to stay in and nothing would be held against us?
It isn't just the Tories. They would be the same with anyone. They are not negotiating at all but tell us what they want to keep like fishing rights in our water.
Of course it can.
Juncker said he would resign his post if the position was taken away from Selmayr. Are you calling Juncker a liar?
I think Junckers 88 has one of the most miserable faces I've ever seen. On that basis alone I would always vote leave to get away from such a depressing spectacle. Too many holidays in the sun I reckon, paid for by us. .
And there is my point.The terms are not compatible with the EU's core treaties and not workable. They've been consistent with that message for nearly 2 years but the cabbages in government have either not understood or deliberately ignored it.
The EU are looking out for their 27 members, particularly Ireland for whom a hard Brexit would be an economic disaster, this is why remain is still an option and why wouldn't it be?
I voted leave but not on the basis that it would not be of such a significant detriment, and, on the basis that the UK government had some sort of plan, I was wrong and naive.
For about the 50th time what was the law that could have been broke?No. He said it. It didn’t mean that the law was ignored because he said it.
And there is my point.
If they wanted to make a deal from the start we wouldn't have had to solve the problem of Ireland before even having a chance to talk about a trade deal.
Being able to talk about which direction to consider with Ireland and having a free trade agreement goes hand in hand. Most of the problems that they say about would be removed if there was to be a free trade agreement. There would be much less talk of where a border would be. I was remain. I didn't even consider them being like they are.
They don't want us to leave the EU. They are doing what they can to force us to stay in the EU. They need our money. They need our trade. They need many things that our membership comes with. They have made it into project fear. Just like the Tories did to try and make us vote remain. I detest bullies and bullying. Have done all my life. And when you add to it how they say we have to keep to their rules and regulations but they break them themselves.
Where have we said we are not willing to pay for what we agreed to?We have a free trade deal, SM and CU. That is the best situation you can get with any country/ bloc. We pay into the EU and accept the terms of the free trade deal.
Now we are leaving, don’t want to pay in and don’t want to accept the terms of the free trade deal.
So first of all we have to agree to pay what we signed up to during our membership, say what will happen to EU citizens living in the EU, and confirm that the Irish border will not be a hard border, as promised in the GFA.
We have automatically lost our free trade deal and will not get a comparable deal with what we now have. The EU would be stupid if they gave us that. The remaining 27 would say, what is the point of us sticking to the terms, if Britain can just pick and choose.
It is perfectly logical to get agreement on the 3 important points before discussing any deals.
They don’t break all their rules. You just made that up.
Here we are again Mart. So explain why the scam as you now call it couldn't be reversed.
Juncker: If Martin Selmayr goes, I go
'If he goes, I go!' - Jean-Claude Juncker threatens to quit in row over 'monster' Eurocrat promotion
Selmayr's stealth promotion was wrong, EU watchdog says
Blackmail?
Selmayr case scars Parliament and Commission
And in Junckers own words he is the only person who could ask Selmayr to resign. And as it was Juncker who was the one who put the debacle together there is no chance of it happening
Macron, Merkel back Juncker's under-fire aide | Reuters
So explain how we can sort out the Ireland problem without knowing about any trade agreement?
For about the 50th time what was the law that could have been broke?
It is all rules and regulations. No laws exist.
The EU is all about rules and regulations.
For about the 50th time what was the law that could have been broke?
It is all rules and regulations. No laws exist.
The EU is all about rules and regulations.
Where have we said we are not willing to pay for what we agreed to?
So what rules were not broke on the appointment of Selmayr?
Juncker’s threat over Selmayr investigation is disrespectful - Sven Giegold - Mitglied der Grünen Fraktion im Europaparlament
So explain how we can sort out the Ireland problem without knowing about any trade agreement?
Now are you sure of it?In Juncker’s own words, he dismissed reports that he had threatened to resign. You have just posted that in the Reuter’s link. Do you read these things?
Yes we do. But it doesn't mean that you and a few others should try to hide or deny the truth like you doThis really is like pulling teeth.
You have to be on the wind up most of the time, no one put themselves across as some sort of expert speaking the truth while showing such ignorance.
The UK needs to ensure that a hard border is avoided to maintain the GFA, to claim it can be sorted out once a free trade agreement has been reached is truly mind-bending stuff.
Twisting the truth again I see.That means all rules and regulations are broken by all members on a daily basis? How does it function at all?
Why do you pretend to be thick to try and prove a point?The Ireland problem is control of the border with the EU. Nothing to do with trade agreements. We have to honour the GFA. It is a treaty registered with the UN. The framework of free trade, no border controls was provided by the EU. If we leave the EU, we automatically lose the framework. The EU, Ireland, Northern Ireland and ultimately in a dispute, the UN, will want to know how the UK proposes to honour the agreement. Without knowing what the UK proposes on this very important point, there is no point negotiating any deal.
Would like to know what your proposals would be, and btw, are you in favour of a Müeller style enquiry into the dodgy referendum? The EU had two for the relatively „minor“ appointment of Selmayr.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?