Some crazy logic in this thread. If Hitler thought the sky was blue and grass is green then that makes us all Naz!s.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by I'll be The Judge of that! (U21434)
posted 2 minutes ago
Watch the queue of OAPs at the PO on Thursday mornings. They collect their pensions pleading poverty then immediately go to the newsagent counter and buy copies of the Mail, Sun, Express, newspapers, 6 x packets of ciggies, 3 large bottles of sherry and about £30 worth of lottery tickets and scratch cards. These are the idiots who voted brexit because they think that brown immigrants squander the benefits that we hand out to them
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Criticising people who stereotype a group of people by stereotyping another group of people what a bell3nd. And stop stalking pensioners.

comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 50 seconds ago
Some crazy logic in this thread. If Hitler thought the sky was blue and grass is green then that makes us all Naz!s.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This would be more like Hitler saying "if this, this and this happened then you'd see the sky is in fact red" and "if we don't stop this and that happening the grass will become purple"

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 50 seconds ago
Some crazy logic in this thread. If Hitler thought the sky was blue and grass is green then that makes us all Naz!s.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This would be more like Hitler saying "if this, this and this happened then you'd see the sky is in fact red" and "if we don't stop this and that happening the grass will become purple"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elvis was criticised because she's apparently a far right racist (don't know anything about her, so I say apparently because those terms are thrown around loosely nowadays) even though her speech had nothing to do with race, nationality or religion. As if agreeing with her views on the EU means endorsing all of her other views as well.

Criticising people who stereotype a group of people by stereotyping another group of people

Not atall.

I would means test the state pension and child benefit.

Its bellends like you who give hardworking immigrants a bad name down the Wheeltappers and WhiteNazi Social Club

So you're one of the 'if you don't agree with me you must be a Naz!'. Why am I not surprised

comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 41 seconds ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 50 seconds ago
Some crazy logic in this thread. If Hitler thought the sky was blue and grass is green then that makes us all Naz!s.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This would be more like Hitler saying "if this, this and this happened then you'd see the sky is in fact red" and "if we don't stop this and that happening the grass will become purple"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elvis was criticised because she's apparently a far right racist (don't know anything about her, so I say apparently because those terms are thrown around loosely nowadays) even though her speech had nothing to do with race, nationality or religion. As if agreeing with her views on the EU means endorsing all of her other views as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To not take into accoint the speaker would be very strange surely? That would be the case when referencing any subject

Of course the other issue in this particular case is the lack of substance in the things said regardless of who is saying them.

AFD and their national policies are boarder line Nazı. Frau.Weidel is a nasty piece of work and shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the talks on Brexit.

Who she is doesn't make what she's saying any more or less valid. It's a tactic used by both sides to smear people by association, mostly by the left nowadays because getting labelled racist or any of the other ism's or phobias is more damaging. She's spot on about the EU's responsibility for Brexit, if they had their finger on the pulse and saw the opportunity for reform then Brexit would never have happened.

comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 19 seconds ago
Who she is doesn't make what she's saying any more or less valid. It's a tactic used by both sides to smear people by association, mostly by the left nowadays because getting labelled racist or any of the other ism's or phobias is more damaging. She's spot on about the EU's responsibility for Brexit, if they had their finger on the pulse and saw the opportunity for reform then Brexit would never have happened.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well at least you have shown your true colours. She's right and valid because she says things you agree with...

Yes she's right on the point that I agree with her on. Don't know what you're on about with true colours, I've said I know nothing about her. Yours is just a weak argument, discredit the individual because you can't debate the points she's making.

comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 4 minutes ago
Yes she's right on the point that I agree with her on. Don't know what you're on about with true colours, I've said I know nothing about her. Yours is just a weak argument, discredit the individual because you can't debate the points she's making.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But the points are just her opinion? No substance and from someone who represents an extremist party.

comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 2 minutes ago

Yes she's right on the point that I agree with her on. Don't know what you're on about with true colours, I've said I know nothing about her. Yours is just a weak argument, discredit the individual because you can't debate the points she's making.

.....................

I think you are suffering from dealing with cretins here, bud.

I fully agree with you on your point here, which really isn't hard to understand.

Just because you might not like someones political views, that doesn't mean they can not be right when making certain points.

For example, Enoch Powells rivers of blood speech was considered racist by many a pundit even back in 1968. But most of his points have proved to since be correct.

Motions for indicative votes selected:

Motion C: Customs union - Proposer: Ken Clarke, Conservative

Motion D: 'Common Market 2.0' - Proposer: Nick Boles, Conservative

Motion E: Confirmatory public vote - Proposers: Peter Kyle and Phil Wilson, Labour

Motion G: Parliamentary supremacy - Proposer: Joanna Cherry, Scottish National Party

Apparently, Labour are to whip behind Common Market 2.0. SNP are also backing it. Could a handful of Tory MPs be persuaded to secure a majority?

VC Scruttocks, it's also just your opinion that there's no substance to what she says. If you disagree then explain why instead of smearing her with unrelated nonsense.

*Thinking about it, TIG votes would also likely be needed, but Umunna has pretty much said that they'll only accept a People's Vote.

German Deputy Foreign Minister Michael Roth:

"Brexit is a big sh1tshow...."

"[90% of May's cabinet] have no idea how workers think, live, work and behave. It won't be [these politicians] born with silver spoons in their mouths, who went to private schools and elite universities who will suffer from Brexit."

Gloves off.

"[90% of Merkel's cabinet] have no idea how workers think, live, work and behave. It won't be [these politicians] born with silver spoons in their mouths, who went to private schools and elite universities and live in gated communities who will suffer from letting in 1 million + economic migrants."

comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 3 minutes ago
"[90% of Merkel's cabinet] have no idea how workers think, live, work and behave. It won't be [these politicians] born with silver spoons in their mouths, who went to private schools and elite universities and live in gated communities who will suffer from letting in 1 million + economic migrants."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What do you know about Merkel's cabinet?

Common market 2.0 could get a majority in parliament if enough Conservatives vote for it but it would be pointless, we may as well remain. Labour are better off backing a 2nd ref with remain and a proper leave option instead.

comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 10 minutes ago
Common market 2.0 could get a majority in parliament if enough Conservatives vote for it but it would be pointless, we may as well remain. Labour are better off backing a 2nd ref with remain and a proper leave option instead.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Would allow us to exit ECJ, CAP, CFP whilst still being able to take part in SM regulation and directive decision shaping.

Would keep us outside Schengen and allow for imposition of immigration curbs if "economic, societal or environmental" arose.

It's quite different to EU membership.

If you want a Brexit that does the most for jobs and the economy, it's the clear option.

*Would keep us outside Schengen and allow for imposition of immigration curbs if "economic, societal or environmental" issues arose.