[Politics] Brexit

[pastafarian]

No darling. Unrelenting meaning your posts in general. All you ever do is make a tit of yourself. But you carry on. "Snowflake" oh dear.... Try your other kiddie insults "soyboy" and "cuck" for the full house of saddo term bingo.

The state of it. LOLZ.

Dear lord, stop wetting the bed, its embarrassing........use the ignore button if it gets you this angry and triggered.

 

[LlcoolJ]

Dear lord, stop wetting the bed, its embarrassing........use the ignore button if it gets you this angry and triggered.

Who's angry? I'm just laughing at how pathetic you are sweetheart.

"Wetting the bed" "triggered". You only know how to converse in teenage internet dialect. Maybe try the real world for a bit. It might assist your attempts to converse with people online.

Night night. X

 

[pastafarian]

Who's angry? I'm just laughing at how pathetic you are sweetheart.

"Wetting the bed" "triggered". You only know how to converse in teenage internet dialect. Maybe try the real world for a bit. It might assist your attempts to converse with people online.

Night night. X

You are a very angry little man.
Cheerio

 

[pastafarian]

Funny that, cos most Gammons would go red in the face saying loudly that this piece was "Political correctness gone mad!"

Interesting.
Are you siding with these so called red faced "Gammons" in thinking this piece is "Political correctness gone mad!",or do you think the author is correct in her view that Gammon in this context is a racial slur and hate speech?

 

[GrizzlingGammon]

Do you eat gammon.

Yes, I eat gammon.

 

[nicko31]

Yes, that would be a start









And, with that, it's over and out from planet earth

I'm afraid you can throw about much facts as you like on here about the WTO, but a number of members on have essentially been consumed by a cult, they don't want to understand how it works.

We have a number of countries that really don't like us and they really can really create big issues for us at the WTO. Then there's the US, country with which we have a large trade surplus via the EU's WTO arrangements. We will get completely screwed over if there's no deal.

No one had ever left a massive trading block before, yet alone in a cliff edge situation and completely ill prepared with it

 

[nicko31]

Going off on a bit of a tangent in here…….but anyway this author believes Gammon in the context you are using is a racial slur against whites and hate-speech. Feel free to contact her not me that she is wrong about people like you.



There is a new term of abuse in politics: a “gammon”. It refers to a middle-aged white man of a certain political persuasion. He is a Brexiteer. He is ugly. He is a conservative. He may wear hideous trousers. And, because he is a Brexiteer and so very ugly and a conservative who may wear hideous trousers, why not call him a gammon? Particularly if you are in politics to have fun, rather than to change minds.
The term is stupid – all name-calling is. Good politics is made of ideas and coalitions and compromises. It’s hard to do, of course, it requires patience and humility, not shouting and grandstanding and undiagnosed malignant narcissism. But calling someone a gammon is not only a stupid waste of a two-syllable word, and meal. It is also, to steal leftist language, hate speech. There seems to be an idea, most recently spoken by Owen Jones, that when the left says something – whatever it is – it is not, and never can be, hate speech. So, let me – as a Jew, shall we say? – explain why it is.
Gammon is pig. And who eats pig? Not Jews and not Muslims. Christians eat pork, white and black. But gammon refers to whites only – to white Christians, then. So now white Christians have their own personal term of abuse, courtesy of the new left. Thank you. For what exactly? For making political discourse cheaper and more disgusting every day? For alienating potential allies in the battle against austerity? For making racial and religious slurs a little more acceptable, while all the time claiming to loathe them, which is, if you have no self-awareness allow me to make you aware of it, hypocrisy? For making floating voters think that socialists are screaming, useless kids who will tear down a world and forget to build another one for name-calling on Twitter? For behaving just as you say your enemies do?
I’m sure the term didn’t begin as a racist slur. It was, as it so often is, a writer trying to be funny.
No one is sure who said it first – they are hardly fighting over it. Dickens used it, but he died before Twitter, and I am happy for him. The journalist Caitlin Moran compared David Cameron to ham and I can see her point. (She didn’t call him “ham”.) The comic Nish Kumarhas said “gammon”, as has the writer Ben Davis, who has since written an article apologising for it. It doesn’t really matter. What matters is that it is the discourse of the sewer. It’s like calling a Jew a k**e or mocking African Americans for eating fried chicken. It’s like calling poor white Americans trailer trash. So much of this sounds like American culture wars transported, horribly and no doubt eternally, to England. It reeks of class snobbery too; no wonder it is popular with the socialist bourgeoisie who, like Citizen Kane, talk about the people as if they own them.
Much of this racism is oblivious, of course, but most racism is oblivious. It isn’t all shooting people in the face. To do that, you must first dehumanise them. And I can’t really think of a better modern example of dehumanisation than comparing your fellow voter to a pig because you don’t like his politics. For saying this, I will be called a Tory and worse. I’m not. I’m Labour. Compute that, comrades.
Tanya Gold
https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/what-does-gammon-mean

Is there such thing now as a "gammon snowflake"?

 

[GrizzlingGammon]

Going off on a bit of a tangent in here…….but anyway this author believes Gammon in the context you are using is a racial slur against whites and hate-speech. Feel free to contact her not me that she is wrong about people like you.



There is a new term of abuse in politics: a “gammon”. It refers to a middle-aged white man of a certain political persuasion. He is a Brexiteer. He is ugly. He is a conservative. He may wear hideous trousers. And, because he is a Brexiteer and so very ugly and a conservative who may wear hideous trousers, why not call him a gammon? Particularly if you are in politics to have fun, rather than to change minds.
The term is stupid – all name-calling is. Good politics is made of ideas and coalitions and compromises. It’s hard to do, of course, it requires patience and humility, not shouting and grandstanding and undiagnosed malignant narcissism. But calling someone a gammon is not only a stupid waste of a two-syllable word, and meal. It is also, to steal leftist language, hate speech. There seems to be an idea, most recently spoken by Owen Jones, that when the left says something – whatever it is – it is not, and never can be, hate speech. So, let me – as a Jew, shall we say? – explain why it is.
Gammon is pig. And who eats pig? Not Jews and not Muslims. Christians eat pork, white and black. But gammon refers to whites only – to white Christians, then. So now white Christians have their own personal term of abuse, courtesy of the new left. Thank you. For what exactly? For making political discourse cheaper and more disgusting every day? For alienating potential allies in the battle against austerity? For making racial and religious slurs a little more acceptable, while all the time claiming to loathe them, which is, if you have no self-awareness allow me to make you aware of it, hypocrisy? For making floating voters think that socialists are screaming, useless kids who will tear down a world and forget to build another one for name-calling on Twitter? For behaving just as you say your enemies do?
I’m sure the term didn’t begin as a racist slur. It was, as it so often is, a writer trying to be funny.
No one is sure who said it first – they are hardly fighting over it. Dickens used it, but he died before Twitter, and I am happy for him. The journalist Caitlin Moran compared David Cameron to ham and I can see her point. (She didn’t call him “ham”.) The comic Nish Kumarhas said “gammon”, as has the writer Ben Davis, who has since written an article apologising for it. It doesn’t really matter. What matters is that it is the discourse of the sewer. It’s like calling a Jew a k**e or mocking African Americans for eating fried chicken. It’s like calling poor white Americans trailer trash. So much of this sounds like American culture wars transported, horribly and no doubt eternally, to England. It reeks of class snobbery too; no wonder it is popular with the socialist bourgeoisie who, like Citizen Kane, talk about the people as if they own them.
Much of this racism is oblivious, of course, but most racism is oblivious. It isn’t all shooting people in the face. To do that, you must first dehumanise them. And I can’t really think of a better modern example of dehumanisation than comparing your fellow voter to a pig because you don’t like his politics. For saying this, I will be called a Tory and worse. I’m not. I’m Labour. Compute that, comrades.
Tanya Gold
https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/what-does-gammon-mean

She is a brexiteer. Her only way of discrediting the term gammon is to make weak claims that it is religious related and, therefore, hate speech.

While we are on usernames, Pastafarian. What about yours? You're laughing at the Rastafarian religion. So is it the Jamaicans or Ethiopians you hate?

 

[cunning fergus]

Aside from the corrupt money and cover up stopping investigations of Aaron Banks. It will all come out in the wash eventually.

Righto, how about I see your currently unsubstantiated claim re corruption with the leave campaign, and raise you the proven involvement of Russian influence with those saintly pro EU stalwarts of Osbourne and Mandelson (and not to mention their mutual friend Mr Rothschild).

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/oct/21/partyfunding-oleg-deripaska

Oleg Depriska is currently a sanctioned individual by the US Govt, but not by HMT or the EU.....go figure.

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sm0338

When the damp panted Herberts’ on here rattle on about how the “establishment” was not pro EU they quite simply don’t have a clue about what is and gone on in U.K. and EU politics.

Their naivety is quite cute really.........the tinkers.

 

[cunning fergus]

Hopefully this thread will get merged with the main Brexit thread. Or maybe the mods can remove the posting rights of those who are banned from the main thread?

Very sensible I’m sure, of course it would be nice if the Mods could explain why those who are banned from the main thread have been banned? Not a peep in over a year, despite recently being unbanned and then banned again in 48 hours.

If my situation could only be explained it could be used as a practical study in how one must conduct oneself on the Brexit thread, an insight that if shared may help us all engage in a gentler kind of political debate......as it were?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

It is not. We can rescinded or extended the date.

Not without an act of Parliament we can't.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

[MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION]
[MENTION=3566]hans kraay fan club[/MENTION]
[MENTION=616]Guinness Boy[/MENTION]

Can this thread now be merged with the main Brexit thread please?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Not without an act of Parliament we can't.

Not necessarily true. In fact clarity on this very matter is being sought as I type.

 

[Guinness Boy]

[MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION]
[MENTION=3566]hans kraay fan club[/MENTION]
[MENTION=616]Guinness Boy[/MENTION]

Can this thread now be merged with the main Brexit thread please?

Having had a look I tend to agree. This is son of Brexit Thread. About to merge.

 

[knocky1]

I'm dreading the remake The Return of the Son of Brexit..................

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Not necessarily true. In fact clarity on this very matter is being sought as I type.

Interesting ..... who is seeking the clarity and who is providing said clarity ?

I ask as at the moment the 29th March is set in stone via an act of Parliament and an act of Parliament can't be overturned without another act of Parliament. The government can't use Henry 8th powers to change it ..... Gina Miller ensured that ironically. The only get out would be if the original act had some mechanism in it to allow a change - i.e. if x happens then then y will be implemented and I haven't seen any media commentary of that being the case ( I'll admit to not having read the act myself although I doubt any posters on this thread have either ).

So to stop us leaving on the 29th one of the following has to happen :

1. A new referendum - let's stop this idiotic dressing it up as a 'Peoples Vote', it's a second referendum if it happens - and remain win. The referendum will need an act of parliament ( and personally I'm not sure there is a majority in favour in the house for it ) and then another act of Parliament will be required to enact the result. Not going to happen before the 29th March.

2. A50 is recinded for a short time or completely. This will change the date of leaving or mean we don't leave and so another act of Parliament will be required. Are there a majority of MPs in favour of doing this ...... remember regardless of their party they will each have to defend their decision to effectively ignore the first referendum result on the doorstep at the next GE and having done so without reconsulting the public. Could make for some very heated exchanges !!!!

3. A50 is extended. Once again, will need an act of Parliament unless there is a mechanism for it in the original act. Biggest problem being the EU - all 27 members would have to agree AND the EU have said it would only happen in the event of something significant happening such as a GE.

I do find it strange that remainers were all up in arms when it looked like the government were going to force through Brexit without Parliament approval but now they want to change/delay/halt Brexit without Parliament's say.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Very sensible I’m sure, of course it would be nice if the Mods could explain why those who are banned from the main thread have been banned? Not a peep in over a year, despite recently being unbanned and then banned again in 48 hours.

If my situation could only be explained it could be used as a practical study in how one must conduct oneself on the Brexit thread, an insight that if shared may help us all engage in a gentler kind of political debate......as it were?

Don’t abuse others, and don’t piss off the mods by accusing them of being paedophile supporters would be a good start.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To which I'd add don't immediately jump on a clone thread and start whining about moderating. Didn't we have a game last night? It's astonishing that some people find a tabloid story about a contracted shipping company more fascinating than the team they support.

 

[Guinness Boy]

I'm dreading the remake The Return of the Son of Brexit..................

Interesting that people who are totally opposed to a second referendum are quite happy with a second thread..........

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Interesting ..... who is seeking the clarity and who is providing said clarity ?

I ask as at the moment the 29th March is set in stone via an act of Parliament and an act of Parliament can't be overturned without another act of Parliament. The government can't use Henry 8th powers to change it ..... Gina Miller ensured that ironically. The only get out would be if the original act had some mechanism in it to allow a change - i.e. if x happens then then y will be implemented and I haven't seen any media commentary of that being the case ( I'll admit to not having read the act myself although I doubt any posters on this thread have either ).

So to stop us leaving on the 29th one of the following has to happen :

1. A new referendum - let's stop this idiotic dressing it up as a 'Peoples Vote', it's a second referendum if it happens - and remain win. The referendum will need an act of parliament ( and personally I'm not sure there is a majority in favour in the house for it ) and then another act of Parliament will be required to enact the result. Not going to happen before the 29th March.

2. A50 is recinded for a short time or completely. This will change the date of leaving or mean we don't leave and so another act of Parliament will be required. Are there a majority of MPs in favour of doing this ...... remember regardless of their party they will each have to defend their decision to effectively ignore the first referendum result on the doorstep at the next GE and having done so without reconsulting the public. Could make for some very heated exchanges !!!!

3. A50 is extended. Once again, will need an act of Parliament unless there is a mechanism for it in the original act. Biggest problem being the EU - all 27 members would have to agree AND the EU have said it would only happen in the event of something significant happening such as a GE.

I do find it strange that remainers were all up in arms when it looked like the government were going to force through Brexit without Parliament approval but now they want to change/delay/halt Brexit without Parliament's say.

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ilaterally-stop-brexit-process-eu-court-rules

“Scottish judges are to hold an emergency hearing in response to the ECJ ruling next week, chaired by Scotland’s most senior judge, Lord Carloway, the lord president, and two other judges, who now have to transpose it into domestic law.

Lawyers for the cross-party group of Scottish parliamentarians who took the case to Luxembourg are expected to argue it means the prime minister is lawfully able to cancel the article 50 process without needing new legislation.”

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Just saw this on a link posted by [MENTION=14365]Thunder Bolt[/MENTION] regarding another matter.

So the conservative government has decided to go along with the EU over our clock changing to harmonize with the rest of europe even though they are committed to leaving the EU in March? I smell bullshit:

https://metro.co.uk/2018/12/29/brit...clocks-eu-rule-change-despite-brexit-8290929/