Which to believe - fake news or official lies ?
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
people are so fecking pathetic
I thought the right-wing types were the sensible, facts-based and less emotional ones?
CRUSH THE SABOTEURS!
ENEMIES OF THE PEOPLE!
STAND UP FOR BRITAIN - FOR ONCE!
Fcuking shut up and lay off the whisky.
This has to be satire. Right? It's got to be.
The entire Daily Mail could be satire but sadly no, it's not.
And now the Lords are urging a rethink. Hypocrisy like this is something a 10-year-old might do.
I became very angry listening to the CEO of that company. His firm makes passports for loads of countries. He has no issue taking their business.
If the French company loses this contract then maybe its time for the EU to have a rethink regarding 'global Britain'
This firm is in business because of the corrupt contracts they have with many countries on which they overcharge for services and pay bungs to officials. They would not be in business anywhere where an ounce of scrutiny would be put on the contracts.
If De La Rue want the contract, they can always lower their price. You know, in the spirit of patriotism and all that.
The same people getting outraged over De La Rue (and what a fine Anglo-Saxon name that is) missing out are the same ones promoting no barrier free trade deals with the likes of India and China where firms can probably offer the same service for half the price.
When do they start issuing these stupid blue passports? After March 2019?
When do they start issuing these stupid blue passports? After March 2019?
Believe the contract for the current passports expires in October 2019.
Brexiters getting wound up by such trivial things, wait until the serious issues start mounting.
I can only imagine her confusion when she sees England's flag. Surely these people are wums and not representative?
Put it this way, in comparison you can have a reasonably intelligent conversation with a french peasant.
Hey, I'll have you know that contrary to Marx, the peasants are the vanguard class with the sharpest political analysis:
Isn‘t the UK in some sort of public submission agreement with the EU that wouldn‘t even allow for giving a contract on nationalist grounds?
All EU law requires is an open bidding process. The UK just picked the cheapest option. Compare and contrast with France (and I think Germany) where they award these contracts to their firms.
Channel 4 news are running hard with this story.
https://www.channel4.com/news/brexit-campaign-was-totally-illegal-claims-whistleblower
https://www.channel4.com/news/brexit-campaign-was-totally-illegal-claims-whistleblower
The response will be that we need to press ahead with respecting the result regardless. There won't be a single revelation or consequence that'll change that.
Lots of use of the word 'claim'. Tried.to read all of it but could not.
Not a surprise.
That looks like a really serious brexiteer and definitely not some student nobhead who has no money to go out on Saturday night
Ah feck off.
Starmers been at the Kool Aid
By the way people say french company but it's historically a franco-dutch company, it's the result of the fusion of Gemplus and Axalto. Today, the company is legally dutch and based in Amsterdam.
Another trivial piece of distraction from May's total failure.
Keir Starmer came across as a bit of a wanker on the telly today. Labour's position on the blue passport debacle should be to mock it as something that was dopey symbolism to begin with, and an outcome that proves we need our European partners across a whole array of areas evidencing the importance of closer integration.
But what actually is the Labour party position?
"We wouldn't have given it to the French *repress gag reflex* in a million years!"
feck off Labour. You're unforgivably shit on Brexit.
But what actually is the Labour party position?
"We wouldn't have given it to the French *repress gag reflex* in a million years!"
feck off Labour. You're unforgivably shit on Brexit.
I think it's a shit position but in this case I don't think it's particularly exclusive to the current leadership. Blair and co would've been all over something which allowed them to look particularly strong on British values, and would've probably been happy to compromise on this one lest they risk losing a few patriotic voters who actually give a feck about this kind of thing.
For sheer political opportunism you're right. However Blair, for his sins, would have opposed Brexit with every fibre of his body from the very start, and being a politician who had the ability to galvanise far beyond his core support, would have succeeded in shaping the Brexit approach by the government into something that looks far, far different to the wet-dream of Rees-Mogg that we have today. Having any leader of the opposition that actually opposed hard Brexit rather than just pretending to but doing nothing about it until after it's close to too late to reverse, is frankly what we're crying out for.
In the early 2000s maybe. But Blair's been despised by considerable portions of the British public and his own party for about a decade now so the above strikes me as largely irrelevant, a bit like a Tory saying how everyone would rally behind Winston Churchill if he were alive now while ignoring a lot of Churchill's abhorrent views that'd alienate him from large portions of the British public.
And Blair's refusal to really acknowledge immigration as an issue for a considerable period of his premiership (irrespective of whether it was or not) and the general loss of Labour support he presided over probably created some of the conditions that eventually led to Brexit.
I'm talking about 1995-2001 Blair. That guy in opposition would have completely annihilated the lame-horse that was May at the 2017 election or, if elected after, would have opposed Brexit more strongly. Let's face it May's government ran probably the worst general election campaign anyone under the age of 70 has ever seen in this country. Expectations under Corbyn were lowered so much that finishing second to that is hailed as a great result.
The window to actually stop a hard brexit is slamming shut and we have Corbyn still refusing to do anything about it except for sack those willing to speak out and moderates who've been brow-beaten into supporting a position they know is disastrous because they fear for their own seats if the Momentum lot get at them should they deviate from Corbyn's "I voted remain...but let's not do anything to stop a hard Brexit' line.
I agree with all of that. Given the incompetence of May et al the opposition should be miles ahead in the polls right now. There's not even any threat that Corbyn can bring May down early, with no apparent attempts at wheeling and dealing with the unhappy Tories at all. The only plan for Europe that Labour seem to have is to wait for Brext to fail and then say 'well it's not our fault, we'd have done it differently', which is a pretty disgraceful approach for me.
As much as it's kind of funny seeing them break down all the errors, this is exactly the kind of shit that led to people voting for this mess.
Publish a load of utter guff, people take it as legit, then hide a retraction a few weeks later that none of them will see.
Oh and that piece of shit Rees-Mogg tweeted the original claims but surprisingly hasn't taken it down:
Not sure if it has been pointed out but the brexiteers even get something as simple as % math wrong.
50% Tariff on 1 £ worth of butter would mean it would cost 1.50 £. 21 % on 79 pence tomatoes would mean they cost 0.95£ etc.
One more brexit newspaper confirming the brexit stereotype.
Or very cunning. Tell people what they want to hear, not what is actually true.