The UK Babe Channels Forum

(03-07-2016 07:58 )Doddle Wrote: [ -> ]One of the few good laughs to be had last weekend was watching Leave supporters slagging off the "Biased Broadcasting Corporation" for its anti-Brexit agenda. I must have missed that,

Yeah, you clearly have missed that.
They're about as neutral as wackawoo

(03-07-2016 01:24 )wackawoo Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2016 22:27 )ShandyHand Wrote: [ -> ]^^ The EU stems from agreements put together after WW2 to protect the peace the people you are speaking of fought for. Leave was a potential first brick in dismantling that. How is it upholding their legacy?

Nato provides security in Europe (UK being a full time member), the EU has nothing much to do with it, that twoddle was shot down early on.

Shot down - what an appropriate phrase! And who did the debunking - one of your approved sources I presume?

You dismiss evidence given to you as biased or flawed if it doesn't fit with your view and tout opinion as fact with little evidence to back it up.

Dipolmacy is as much a peace keeping force as anything else in any case. Why look to remove ourselves from one of the major pillars of that if we are so concerned with what was fought for?

(03-07-2016 08:51 )ShandyHand Wrote: [ -> ]Shot down - what an appropriate phrase! And who did the debunking - one of your approved sources I presume?

You dismiss evidence given to you as biased or flawed if it doesn't fit with your view and tout opinion as fact with little evidence to back it up.

Dipolmacy is as much a peace keeping force as anything else in any case. Why look to remove ourselves from one of the major pillars of that if we are so concerned with what was fought for?

Pretty much every were I saw it mentioned, on the TV and so on, see when I make my comments it's always based on that, I don't make these things up personally, if you don't think NATO has anything to do with the security in Europe that's fine. It's also absolutely nothing to do with the United Nations either.

Why are you saying we have 'removed' our selfs from the security of Europe? what evidence do you have for this? No negotiations have taken place yet, I would have assumed (with little evidence to back it up) that the UK will cooperate fully with the security of the EU; and the rest of the world for that matter.

It only seems to be the remain camp that wants people in the UK to think there could not possibly be eny security cooperation and we are all going to die of a terroist bomb under our beds has a consequence.

(03-07-2016 07:58 )Doddle Wrote: [ -> ]One of the few good laughs to be had last weekend was watching Leave supporters slagging off the "Biased Broadcasting Corporation" for its anti-Brexit agenda. I must have missed that, they were pretty nakedly pro-Brexit whenever I tuned in. Maybe there was a special anti-Brexit episode of Teletubbies or something?

This is becasue you look at the TV with bias eyes.

Only yesterday I was watching the BBC and there was nothing on it but sympathy for the remain camp, the way they trotted out poor fightened imigrants saying how they don't feel welcome any more in their places of work. Another was a very over weight woman with a child crying about her uncertain future, whilst sat with the remnants of an expensive take away all around her.

When I first started looking into this there was a best and a worse case scenario I was reading from finantial experts (on this thread some where) it said, that the worst case scenario of leaving the EU was a decrease of 2% in the GNP and the best was an INCREASE of about 1 - 2%. We never hear anyhting about the increase.

All we hear is the negative, how there is more racist attacks, how terrible it is that the Uk are not nice and kind to the imigrants, the same imigrants that were such a problem on the same news a few months ago) how the young have had their future stolen, how there will be boarders in ireland and therefore the troubles will be back, how the people are rising up and marching through the streets of london, how there will be no security left, how all the business will die, how the economay will come to a grinding halt. All this of course you will find merely objective news reporting becasue it fits what you think. I see very little reporting of the possitive, I have to go to CNBC for that.

It is an ironic fact that I am one of the rare people that is completely objective and look at it from both sides. The leave side I cannot comment on becasue no negotiations have taken place yet, some of what the leave claim has been EXAGGERATED rather that found false (Ibelieve rather than 350 million into the NHS it's 100 million which is still a massive load extra in the NHS in my mind) but equally, the remain are also very much exagerated, imigrants for instance have always worked in the UK with out being in the EU, look at all the Australians, they manage it.

But the remain people on here are the most closed minded people I have ever debated with, there simply is no debate, remain good, leave bad end off, anybody who thinks different to that are stupid and we should all try and ridecule their posts.

There is nothing like, well we are here now, a demographic vote was taken and we lost, what is the best way forward? hang on, no, we didn't get our way so we will should loudest about the most negative aspects and wave the race card around, ignoring anyhting that remotely be possitive; that way we might get our own way - fuck democracey, who needs it.

It's this that irking me more than anything.

(03-07-2016 14:06 )wackawoo Wrote: [ -> ]I am one of the rare people that is completely objective and look at it from both sides.

Comedy gold.

(03-07-2016 13:40 )wackawoo Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-07-2016 08:51 )ShandyHand Wrote: [ -> ]Shot down - what an appropriate phrase! And who did the debunking - one of your approved sources I presume?

You dismiss evidence given to you as biased or flawed if it doesn't fit with your view and tout opinion as fact with little evidence to back it up.

Dipolmacy is as much a peace keeping force as anything else in any case. Why look to remove ourselves from one of the major pillars of that if we are so concerned with what was fought for?

Pretty much every were I saw it mentioned, on the TV and so on, see when I make my comments it's always based on that, I don't make these things up personally, if you don't think NATO has anything to do with the security in Europe that's fine. It's also absolutely nothing to do with the United Nations either.

Why are you saying we have 'removed' our selfs from the security of Europe? what evidence do you have for this? No negotiations have taken place yet, I would have assumed (with little evidence to back it up) that the UK will cooperate fully with the security of the EU; and the rest of the world for that matter.

It only seems to be the remain camp that wants people in the UK to think there could not possibly be eny security cooperation and we are all going to die of a terroist bomb under our beds has a consequence.

Please don't put words in my mouth. Where did I say anything about NATO not having anything to do with security (a ridiculous statement) or anything at all about the UN... I forgot that you make the same vast assumptions about others that you are quick to accuse fellow posters of making about yourself.

Again, I have said zero about removing ourselves from 'the security of Europe' (i.e. more than one organization). I have said that what we are doing with Brexit is destabilising the future of the EU and not helping with its diplomatic mission. No more no less than this.

You do yourself no credit by using a tactic from the tabloids in exaggerating other people's arguments into something they didn't actually say in order to try and mock them. It is a schoolboy approach to debate.

Lastly, if you would like to see the EU fail entirely then I think it would be helpful if you said so. Your overall tone on here suggests it but this could do with clarifying I feel.

Wackawoo I've been consistent in my complete abhorrence of the Leave campaign anti immigrant stance. Seemingly one reason why Gove stabbed Boris in the back was he felt Boris was going to renege on the promise to end freedom of movement.

You have questioned the veracity of reports that hate crimes have increased. Perhaps you could tell me why leaders all political parties (not sure about UKIP but might just be I have not heard him) have publically come out against the despicable things that have been done since the referendum. If you deny it then I'm afraid people might make assumptions about where your sympathies lie.

The reason we are hearing about negative impacts is that is what forecasters continue to expect but please feel free to dismiss these experts as all Leave sympathisers do.

As I have also repeatedly stated the vote has taken place and we are leaving the EU. My own personal preference would be a general election or further referendum once the terms of exit have been agreed but of course you have previously denounced any future democratic decision as invalid. Curious when you proudly announce you don't take part in democratic decisions - you seem to prefer to criticise rather than have the courage of your convictions

(03-07-2016 14:10 )southlondonphil Wrote: [ -> ]Comedy gold.

My, point proven, I have cearly looked at it from both sides, you just see what you want to.

Are you saying there has been absolutely no over exaggeration on the remain side?

At the moment we are in the EU, article 50 has not been envoked yet, it doesn't look like it will be untill there is another leader of the tories, then and only then can any negotiations take place, other than that it is merely speculation. Can you argue with this statement?

I have seen the markets go down, but i was also watching ALL DAY what the American finanial people were saying, did you?

I know there has on the leave side. When did I ever deny this?

(03-07-2016 14:49 )SecretAgent Wrote: [ -> ]Wackawoo I've been consistent in my complete abhorrence of the Leave campaign anti immigrant stance.

And this is where the exaggeration is, and why I consistantly challenged the remain camp, it is not about imigration it is about the control of numbers, even pre referendum government aknowledge this is a problem, so do other countries, before the referendum, this problem and illegal imigrants seem to be news worthy, apparently no more.

Quote:You have questioned the veracity of reports that hate crimes have increased. Perhaps you could tell me why leaders all political parties (not sure about UKIP but might just be I have not heard him) have publically come out against the despicable things that have been done since the referendum. If you deny it then I'm afraid people might make assumptions about where your sympathies lie.

And this is where the remain camp becomes disingenuous, I never said hate crimes were not happening i said maybe the ones that are are being more reported and the referendum blamed. If you are some one who hates imigrants so much to physically attack them, then your going to attack them irrespective of any vote, the referendum DOES NOT give anybody a right to attack anybody else. You mention all these despicable things, i was watching the news yeaterday for quite a long time (mainly due to Caroline Aherne (daughter of imigrants) )and I never saw a thing about these attacks, other than a statment that they were happening, not real examples.

Quote:The reason we are hearing about negative impacts is that is what forecasters continue to expect but please feel free to dismiss these experts as all Leave sympathisers do.

I have said umpteen times that the markets have gone down, I stated that this was expected, I have also stated that a more objective view is the UK leaving would not be a significant long term problem and it actually can be good. This we never hear about.

Quote:As I have also repeatedly stated the vote has taken place and we are leaving the EU. My own personal preference would be a general election or further referendum once the terms of exit have been agreed but of course you have previously denounced any future democratic decision as invalid.

Please find me this quote where I have declared them invalid? I would have no problem with a second referendum, I too have stated this before (seems you forgot that as well), it would seem odd to have it when the terms of the agreement have taken place, but I have stated that maybe 1 million is probably not enough to make such an historical decission. But what if there was another referendum? (or indeed the first one) and the remain won by 1 million? I suspect that that would be perfectly acceptable result and any objections by the leave camp would be met with outrage. My objection was if the government just IGNORED the vote, a very different thing.

Quote:Curious when you proudly announce you don't take part in democratic decisions - you seem to prefer to criticise rather than have the courage of your convictions

I do have the courage of my convictions, I have stead fastly and consistantly stated the same things from the word get go, this is despite a barrage of prejudice persons (who probably haven't even read what I have put properly) manipulating what I have writian for their own ends, and personally attacking me; a democrecy is about ALL view points, for, against AND undecided.

Your latest reply to me is a great example, you are trying to manipulate what I have been saying to try and make it look like I am a leave supporter, even including out right lies. The problem with people who manipulate, they can be countered and taken down with facts, I could even provide links the post made weeks ago which would diametrically rebuff everything you have said about me, which, sadly, i have had to do on occasions.

Another one whos quitting now they dropped the country into the brown stuff

Farage Quit as UKIP leader