[Politics] Brexit

[Triggaaar]

Actually, no it really isn't completely different.

It's unbelievable that you can stick to this belief, despite clear dictionary definitions showing you are wrong.

Anyway, you are going to make yourself ill.

No I'm good.

I know I'm right

You might think you know, but I find even that hard to believe.

Have a lovely weekend, I hope that anyone that goes to the pub tonight

Anyone who goes.

 

[Two Professors]

I don't think I would be alone in thinking that if you are in a bar with friends at an away match and the only thing you can find to talk about is whether The Clamp cleans toilets at Wettons you're even more of a **** than I thought.

It was before the match and it was Nibble they were on about.But that's you anyway!

 

[Two Professors]

Well then. The EU begins to show its true colours today. Just like the mafia, once in always in, and woe betide anyone who tries to escape!

Not the sort of club I want to be a member of thank you.

Well said that man (or woman)!

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Well then. The EU begins to show its true colours today. Just like the mafia, once in always in, and woe betide anyone who tries to escape!

Not the sort of club I want to be a member of thank you.

Threatening the security and lives of others is much better?

 

[SeagullinExile]

Threatening the security and lives of others is much better?

Nah...you've lost me.

 

[GT49er]

Threatening the security and lives of others is much better?

Much better than what?

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Nah...you've lost me.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4362722/Terrorism-threat-Europe-UK-refused-trade-deal.html

 

[SeagullinExile]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4362722/Terrorism-threat-Europe-UK-refused-trade-deal.html

Sorry. I'm allergic to the Daily Mail

Besides, I was merely commenting on today's Gibraltar 'stuff'.

 

[The Clamp]

It's unbelievable that you can stick to this belief, despite clear dictionary definitions showing you are wrong.

No I'm good.
You might think you know, but I find even that hard to believe.
Anyone who goes.

Saying "anyone who voted for brexit is thick" is EXACTLY the same as saying "everyone who voted for Brexit is thick". It has exactly the same meaning in this context. This is what I was accused of saying. I didn't say that. That's it. Nothing else to say. I'm at a loss to see how you have become so muddled and confused about the whole thing. That's all there is to it. It's mind boggling how you are so flummoxed by it.

 

[beorhthelm]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4362722/Terrorism-threat-Europe-UK-refused-trade-deal.html

you ought to read the full text for yourself. while there's certainly a link drawn between security and trade, its no where near "threaten security" the media has dressed it up as. in one instance its a matter of two subjects in ajoining sentances. in the other it the resonable point we cant help with security if theres no agreement on security (not relating to trade at all).

 

[Triggaaar]

Saying "anyone who voted for brexit is thick" is EXACTLY the same as saying "everyone who voted for Brexit is thick". It has exactly the same meaning in this context.

But you didn't say those things, so that's not the definition we're arguing about. You did say "I never stated anyone who voted leave was thick" and that's wrong. If you had said " I never stated: 'anyone who voted for brexit is thick' " you'd be ok, but you didn't. I didn't read BB's post, I just read your comment, and it was wrong. I understand why you got it wrong, but it's still ****ing wrong!

This is what I was accused of saying. I didn't say that.

Agreed.

That's it.

It's not, because after not saying something you were accused of, you then went and said something else that was wrong.

I'm at a loss to see how you have become so muddled and confused about the whole thing.

I'm not, I now know what you meant, but what you typed was still wrong.

 

[The Clamp]

But you didn't say those things, so that's not the definition we're arguing about. You did say "I never stated anyone who voted leave was thick" and that's wrong. If you had said " I never stated: 'anyone who voted for brexit is thick' " you'd be ok, but you didn't. I didn't read BB's post, I just read your comment, and it was wrong. I understand why you got it wrong, but it's still ****ing wrong!

Agreed.
It's not, because after not saying something you were accused of, you then went and said something else that was wrong.

I'm not, I now know what you meant, but what you typed was still wrong.

I think you have misunderstood the meaning of "anyone" in my sentence. I meant it in the same context BB meant it, to mean "everyone". It makes much more sense if you hear it rather than type it. However you have already admitted you didn't read the original post so I can see why you have become confused. Anyhow, I can't explain it any other way so I'm just going to have to live with you thinking I'm wrong. I think I'll get over it. Goodnight.

 

[Billy the Fish]

So the EU is using Gib as a bargaining chip. If it was the UK doing that, there would be outcry on this thread from from every one of the usual suspects.

 

[knocky1]

So the EU is using Gib as a bargaining chip. If it was the UK doing that, there would be outcry on this thread from from every one of the usual suspects.

How can the UK use Gibraltar to get at the EU?

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

you ought to read the full text for yourself. while there's certainly a link drawn between security and trade, its no where near "threaten security" the media has dressed it up as. in one instance its a matter of two subjects in ajoining sentances. in the other it the resonable point we cant help with security if theres no agreement on security (not relating to trade at all).

Sure, not how the EU have taken it and there was no need to mention it.

They put it in as a threat and its backfired.

Security is something that was going to be a gimme all round, I doubt it would have crossed anyone's minds that it wouldn't.

 

[Driver8]

So the EU is using Gib as a bargaining chip. If it was the UK doing that, there would be outcry on this thread from from every one of the usual suspects.

We are threatening to withdraw our security cooperation instead.

Whoever expects this to be plain sailing is deluded. The EU hold most the aces.

 

[GoldWithFalmer]

How can the UK use Gibraltar to get at the EU?

Use it as a pinch point for a blockade of the MED. "cannons" on the cliff tops and all that...

 

[GT49er]

How can the UK use Gibraltar to get at the EU?

Land the SAS and the Royal Tank Regiment there and straight up through Spain to the soft underbelly of the EU?






Oh, sorry - are we just talking politics here?

 

[GT49er]

We are threatening to withdraw our security cooperation instead.

Whoever expects this to be plain sailing is deluded. The EU hold most the aces.

Doubtless they do hold some. So do we. Our security expertise for a start.

Yes, that is a bargaining chip - one that we hold, no matter how much that offends you, just as the EU are trying to make Gib one of their's. What we have added as a caveat to our bargaining chip, very, very clearly, is that we want to retain full co-operation - so it's over to you EU.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Doubtless they do hold some. So do we. Our security expertise for a start.

Yes, that is a bargaining chip - one that we hold, no matter how much that offends you, just as the EU are trying to make Gib one of their's. What we have added as a caveat to our bargaining chip, very, very clearly, is that we want to retain full co-operation - so it's over to you EU.

So what you are suggesting is if the EU and ourselves don't agree on a deal, we will withdraw our security forces.

So if we get wind of a potential terror attack on Paris, we won't do anything?

Just let people die?