Brexit Satire

[jra]

You leave a club, you lose the benefits of that club. There is no punishment, only consequences.

You should also lose the disadvantages. There are some, like ditching the CAP, CFP, MEPs, subsidies to the EU and like making all our own laws (not made by the EU or influenced by other EU member states).

The communists used to silence/shout down any dissent, much like the remainers are doing here and on DS to the leavers.

We should ditch the EU, start with a clean slate and cherry pick the EU legislation (aka red tape) of the bits that will benefit us.

which us though?

things that will benefit one group will have devastating consequences for another.

workers could well find themselves on the disadvantaged end of legislation that will benefit employers.

it's the little people that are going to suffer without the protection of the eu's human rights.

The UK as a whole.

Did I say ditch EU human rights? That probably would be one bit we should keep. That can be enshrined in UK law, not EU law.

[McAz]

You leave a club, you lose the benefits of that club. There is no punishment, only consequences.

You should also lose the disadvantages. There are some, like ditching the CAP, CFP, MEPs, subsidies to the EU and like making all our own laws (not made by the EU or influenced by other EU member states).

The communists used to silence/shout down any dissent, much like the remainers are doing here and on DS to the leavers.

We should ditch the EU, start with a clean slate and cherry pick the EU legislation (aka red tape) of the bits that will benefit us.

which us though?

things that will benefit one group will have devastating consequences for another.

workers could well find themselves on the disadvantaged end of legislation that will benefit employers.

it's the little people that are going to suffer without the protection of the eu's human rights.

The UK as a whole.

Did I say ditch EU human rights? That probably would be one bit we should keep. That can be enshrined in UK law, not EU law.

The debate is now over, jra. The country's fate is now with Parliament.

[jra]

You leave a club, you lose the benefits of that club. There is no punishment, only consequences.

You should also lose the disadvantages. There are some, like ditching the CAP, CFP, MEPs, subsidies to the EU and like making all our own laws (not made by the EU or influenced by other EU member states).

The communists used to silence/shout down any dissent, much like the remainers are doing here and on DS to the leavers.

We should ditch the EU, start with a clean slate and cherry pick the EU legislation (aka red tape) of the bits that will benefit us.

which us though?

things that will benefit one group will have devastating consequences for another.

workers could well find themselves on the disadvantaged end of legislation that will benefit employers.

it's the little people that are going to suffer without the protection of the eu's human rights.

The UK as a whole.

Did I say ditch EU human rights? That probably would be one bit we should keep. That can be enshrined in UK law, not EU law.

The debate is now over, jra. The country's fate is now with Parliament.

It always was essentially. Have a referendum as in test the water. Then do whatever we (parliament) think should happen, not necessarily what the electorate wants. The debate may be over for you, but I can see this going on and on and on.

[McAz]

The debate is now over, jra. The country's fate is now with Parliament.

It always was essentially. Have a referendum as in test the water. Then do whatever we think should happen, not necessarily what the electorate wants. The debate may be over for you, but I can see this going on and on and on.

The electorate wants to remain - with luck their representatives in parliament will reflect that as is their duty.

[jra]

The debate is now over, jra. The country's fate is now with Parliament.

It always was essentially. Have a referendum as in test the water. Then do whatever we think should happen, not necessarily what the electorate wants. The debate may be over for you, but I can see this going on and on and on.

The electorate wants to remain - with luck their representatives in parliament will reflect that as is their duty.

They didn't at the time of the referendum. Now that we've had 2+ years of brainwashing and propaganda from the remainers, UK parliament and the EU, that most likely has changed. Now neither side is likely to get what they want.

[McAz]

The debate is now over, jra. The country's fate is now with Parliament.

It always was essentially. Have a referendum as in test the water. Then do whatever we think should happen, not necessarily what the electorate wants. The debate may be over for you, but I can see this going on and on and on.

The electorate wants to remain - with luck their representatives in parliament will reflect that as is their duty.

They didn't at the time of the referendum. Now that we've had 2+ years of brainwashing and propaganda from the remainers, UK parliament and the EU, that most likely has changed. Now neither side is likely to get what they want.

They had many more years of brainwashing and propaganda from nationalists and isolationists before the referendum - such is politics.

I'm getting something of what I want either way.

[banana chewits]

You leave a club, you lose the benefits of that club. There is no punishment, only consequences.

You should also lose the disadvantages. There are some, like ditching the CAP, CFP, MEPs, subsidies to the EU and like making all our own laws (not made by the EU or influenced by other EU member states).

The communists used to silence/shout down any dissent, much like the remainers are doing here and on DS to the leavers.

We should ditch the EU, start with a clean slate and cherry pick the EU legislation (aka red tape) of the bits that will benefit us.

which us though?

things that will benefit one group will have devastating consequences for another.

workers could well find themselves on the disadvantaged end of legislation that will benefit employers.

it's the little people that are going to suffer without the protection of the eu's human rights.

The UK as a whole.

Did I say ditch EU human rights? That probably would be one bit we should keep. That can be enshrined in UK law, not EU law.

may wanted to ditch them, brussels made her agree to keep them as part of any deal.

there might be a no deal brexit.

it's not really your shout if they're ditched or not.

[Grafenwalder]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-46891769/david-cameron-i-don-t-regret-calling-referendum

I wonder if Dave still has the Clarkson neighbours round for Bolly and burgers?

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingn ... 97845.html

[Stooo]

The debate is now over, jra. The country's fate is now with Parliament.

It always was essentially. Have a referendum as in test the water. Then do whatever we think should happen, not necessarily what the electorate wants. The debate may be over for you, but I can see this going on and on and on.

The electorate wants to remain - with luck their representatives in parliament will reflect that as is their duty.

They didn't at the time of the referendum. Now that we've had 2+ years of brainwashing and propaganda from the remainers, UK parliament and the EU, that most likely has changed. Now neither side is likely to get what they want.

So we burn out, we get shortages, people die, we get martial law, we get a government of national emergency, things get worse, as a nuclear power we are forced to return our deterrent while Russia gloats. Normality and elections are mooted with a strong feeling towards rejoining as full members.

That's as far as I can go because I feel that I will be dead when we get to this bit.

[Stooo]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-46891769/david-cameron-i-don-t-regret-calling-referendum

I wonder if Dave still has the Clarkson neighbours round for Bolly and burgers?

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingn ... 97845.html

Clarkson has always been pro-EU.

[Stooo]

Tim Martin is a wanker and he mugged you all...

[Cannydc]

how could anyone be stupid enough to vote for brexit?..i mean its the EU or DISASTER. Thats the choice. 'If you leave us we will injure you'..'We know whats best for you

Injure, how?

in all the ways -mostly economic-that the remainers have clearly stated on this forum. Just a fact of life.

You leave a club, you lose the benefits of that club. There is no punishment, only consequences.

You should also lose the disadvantages. There are some, like ditching the CAP, CFP, MEPs, subsidies to the EU and like making all our own laws (not made by the EU or influenced by other EU member states).

The communists used to silence/shout down any dissent, much like the remainers are doing here and on DS to the leavers.

We should ditch the EU, start with a clean slate and cherry pick the EU legislation (aka red tape) of the bits that will benefit us.

Mr + Mrs Average don't give a monkey's about the CAP, CFP, MEPs and subsidies to the EU. Mrs A will be well peeved if there's no salad veg coming in from the EU (See today's news https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47028748 ) and Mr A will be shocked to see that his employers now expect him to work a 55 hour week with no paid meal breaks. The family holiday to Eurodisney is off, after the pound crashed to below parity with the euro, and when visa costs and more expensive flights were factored in it is now well outside their budget.

That's the things they will see, that will hit them most.

But it's what 17.4m voted for. Hard luck.

[Cannydc]

The debate is now over, jra. The country's fate is now with Parliament.

It always was essentially. Have a referendum as in test the water. Then do whatever we think should happen, not necessarily what the electorate wants. The debate may be over for you, but I can see this going on and on and on.

The electorate wants to remain - with luck their representatives in parliament will reflect that as is their duty.

They didn't at the time of the referendum. Now that we've had 2+ years of brainwashing and propaganda from the remainers, UK parliament and the EU, that most likely has changed. Now neither side is likely to get what they want.

40 years of this, propagated by Tory supporting tabloids....

https://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/eu ... a-z-index/

Just one example A is for ALE;

Eurocrats call time on light ale (Daily Mail 11 May 2005)
Bureaucrats in Brussels want to force British brewers to change the name of light ale. They claim drinkers could be misled into thinking the beer is a low-calorie or low-alcohol ‘lite’ drink… Opposing the move is London Tory MEP John Bowis, who said yesterday: “It is totally intolerable that a traditional British ale should be threatened by a piece of bureaucracy like this.”

Hands off our light ale (Daily Express 12 May 2005)
A battle was brewing in Brussels last night to protect the name of light ale from Euro-legislators. New laws are being drafted to crack down on misleading descriptions on food and drink labels. And the European Commission fears that the word “light” could suggest the product is less fattening. Conservative MEP John Bowis is leading moves to vote the plans down… “We are fighting this because light ale is likely to be caught in the net, even though the use of the word “light” in that case relates to the colour and character of the beer, not to any claims that it is less fattening.”

The term light ale refers to the colour of the beer – that’s why it is also known as pale ale as opposed to dark ale – and not its alcohol or calorie content. Thus, the Commission does not consider light ale to be a health or nutrition claim. In this particular case, however, it would be up to the British government to determine whether light ale fell within the scope of the legislation......

[Cannydc]

Just one more, one we remember well...

B is for BANANAS

Curved bananas have been banned by Brussels bureaucrats, with shops ordered not to sell fruit which is too small or abnormally bent.
Sources: The Sun, Daily Mirror, Daily Mail, Daily Express (21 September 1994)

Truth: Yes … and no. Curved bananas have not been banned. In fact, as with the supposed banning of curved cucumbers, the Commission regulation classifies bananas according to quality and size for the sake of easing the trade of bananas internationally.

Quality standards are necessary in order that people buying and ordering bananas can rest assured that what they are getting lives up to their expectations. Individual EU member states have tended to have their own standards, as has the industry (whose standards are often very stringent). The European Commission was asked by the Council of Ministers and the industry to prepare a draft regulation laying down EU quality standards, and this has been the subject of consultation for some time now. As such it represents a consensus position. The following points should be noted however:

1) These are minimal rules, applied solely to green, unripe bananas, rather than those destined for the processing industry.
2) These standards should improve the quality of bananas produced within the Community. They should thus be able to command a higher price in the Community markets. This should also help reduce Community aid and therefore relieve pressure on the Community budget.
3) Far from being an interference in trade these norms should facilitate it throughout the Community

[Stooo]

Following, especially after the Owen Jones interview.