On watching the video I love the reaction at 5:47 of the bloke sitting behind him at the top right of the picture.
On watching the video I love the reaction at 5:47 of the bloke sitting behind him at the top right of the picture.
Just use enough water to cover your vegetables,the same goes for when you're having a bath....
Ganty (28th June 2016)
CzarJunkie (28th June 2016), Ganty (28th June 2016)
This article sums it up for me, well worth a read.
http://rationalradical.me/2016/06/left-celebrate-brexit-uk-just-kicked-neoliberalism-nuts/
There you go minority........ your knight in shining armour! Pmsl!
Jeremy Hunt suggests second EU referendum - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36647948
Reality Check: Have Leave campaigners changed their tune?
The Reality Check team looks at some of the claims and promises made during the campaign by Leave campaigners who now appear to have modified their positions.
The campaign claim: Immigration levels could be controlled if the UK left the EU. This would relieve pressure on public services.
The current claim: Immigration levels can't be radically reduced by leaving the EU. Fears about immigration did not influence the way people voted.
Reality Check verdict: During the campaign, some Leave campaigners sent a clear message that the referendum was about controlling immigration. Some are now being more nuanced, saying the UK's decision to leave the EU would not guarantee a significant decrease in immigration levels.
Immigration was the key issue of the EU referendum campaign, and Vote Leave's focus on it was a key part of their strategy.
One of the main claims of the campaign centred around control of immigration levels.
Responding to the latest Office for National Statistics (ONS) figures, which showed that overall net migration stands at 333,000, MEP Nigel Farage said: "Mass immigration is still hopelessly out of control and set to get worse if we remain inside the EU."
Though Mr Farags was not part of the official Vote Leave campaign but campaigned in favour of leaving the EU, similar claims were later echoed by Vote Leave campaigner Gisela Stuart.
She said voting to remain meant there would be "no control" over migration from the EU, "no matter how great the pressure on schools, hospitals and housing becomes or how much wages in our poorest communities are pushed down".
Similarly, leading pro-Leave campaigner and Tory leader front runner Boris Johnson said that the only solution to the scale of immigration which the UK was facing, was to leave the EU.
He claimed a vote to stay in the union would mean people "kissing goodbye permanently to control of immigration".
The Leave campaign also repeatedly linked EU migration with pressure on public services.
On the 20 May, Vote Leave produced a document which it claimed outlined the pressure that migration from the European Union would put on the NHS - a 28% to 57% increase in demand for accident and emergency services.
As we discovered, an increasing population would put additional demand on A&E but the extent of that increase had not been demonstrated.
But in an article published in the Daily Telegraph on Monday, Mr Johnson denied a victory for leaving the EU could be linked to immigration.
He wrote: "It is said that those who voted Leave were mainly driven by anxieties about immigration. I do not believe that is so."
And speaking to the BBC's Newsnight programme on Saturday, MEP Daniel Hannan insisted the public had not been misled over how much control the country would have over immigration post-Brexit.
In a heated exchange with Evan Davis, he said: "We never said there was going to be some radical decline ... we want a measure of control".
"Frankly, if people watching think that they have voted and there is now going to be zero immigration from the EU, they are going to be disappointed."
The campaign claim: We send £350m a week to Brussels, which could be spent on the NHS instead.
The current claim: The claim was a mistake, and we will not be able to spend that much extra on the NHS.
Reality Check verdict: Some of those who campaigned for Leave are now distancing themselves from this claim. Some have gone as far as admitting that it had been a mistake.
One of the most controversial claims of the campaign was that the UK sends £350m a week (or £50m a day) to Brussels, which could be spent on the NHS instead.
Vote Leave's Gisela Stuart was among those to make the claim, saying "Every week we send £350m to Brussels. I'd rather that we control how to spend that money, and if I had that control I would spend it on the NHS."
Many bodies including the UK Statistics Authority pointed out that we do not send that much a week because the rebate is deducted before any money is spent.
Over the weekend, Nigel Farage said making the claim had been "a mistake".
On Sunday's Andrew Marr Show, Iain Duncan Smith was shown a Vote Leave poster saying: "Let's give our NHS the £350m the EU takes every week," but he denied that promise had been made and said instead that the NHS would receive "the lion's share" of money that would no longer be spent on the EU.
The actual amount sent to Brussels each week in 2014 was £276m, a little over £100m of which is spent on things in the UK such as subsidising farmers and funding research, which the Leave campaign also promised to continue funding until 2020.
The single market
The campaign claim: Some on the Leave side suggested the UK does not need preferential access to the single market.
The current claim: The UK should get preferential access to the single market but will not have to accept freedom of movement to get it.
Reality Check verdict: The position has shifted from claims the UK could trade under World Trade Organisation rules to one which suggests the UK will continue to have preferential access to the single market, but at the same time having some control over immigration levels.
During the campaign, some Leave campaigners said that the UK outside of the EU would not need preferential access to the single market and would just trade under World Trade Organization rules.
This was the basis of research by Economists for Brexit, who said the UK should unilaterally remove all tariffs on imports.
But writing in the Telegraph on Monday, Boris Johnson quoted German employers' organisation the BDI as saying there would continue to be free trade and access to the single market.
The BDI later denied this.
If the UK wanted to retain preferential access to the single market, many European politicians say it would have to continue to accept freedom of movement.
Boris Johnson said that British people would continue to be able to live, work and study in the EU, while at the same time the UK would be able to introduce a points-based system to control migration.
Leader of the House of Commons Chris Grayling said that we would be able to have a free trade agreement with the EU while at the same time controlling the flow of people coming into the country.
The UK can certainly aim to secure such a deal.
But no country so far has managed a deal that allows full preferential access to the single market without having to accept freedom of movement.
BBC
Over Carl (29th June 2016)
ALL politicians are lying cunts, nothing new there.
billynoguts (28th June 2016), Over Carl (29th June 2016), piggzy (28th June 2016)
Having looked at what politicians have said before and after the referendum you can say both sides equally (or 48/52 split ) have changed their views since the result. Politicians are fighting for their jobs and will say anything they can to appear to be with the people. I am sure I heard that approximately three quarter of our elected MP's wanted to stay in the EU so no surprise that they are flipping like fish out of water! As ilscuro said they are all the same!
BigBird (28th June 2016)
You maybe right but you as all of us had a vote and the majority wanted out! You are quite rightly allowed an opinion as we all are but as we live in a democracy the majority wins and the rest have to get on with it. A point that a lot of people can't accept but it's a free country. Saying people are gullible is meaningless, we should maybe question the main stream media to tell the TRUTH more to give (especially me a thick uneducated knuckle dragging Neanderthal northerner) a MORE informed decision........then I would have voted LEAVE for sure!
Voted out on lies some gullible people believed these lies, I don't have a problem with people who saw through these lies and still voted to leave, BigBird said in the other thread he accepted that free movement of people would probably be the case if we were to get free trade and said he accepted that and still felt he wanted to vote to leave which I respect although question on a moral basis of getting what you want knowing the vote is only won with lies.
Now do you honestly believe this and if you don't with the back tracking now do you accept the vote was won on a lie.Johnson denied a victory for leaving the EU could be linked to immigration
Just one more do you still stand by this quote you posted in the other thread: The UK economy will benefit to the tune of £billions in the first year after we leave.
Could a vote of no confidence be brought up for up this current government forcing them to have another general election seeing as there were no contingency plans if people voted leave. I mean it sort of is their job to plan for most eventuality's and seeing as though Cameron's response was to step down (as he promised he would do) but not wanted to tarnish the good name that he thinks he has, decided to bottle out of finishing what he started.
Our exit is simple 27 countries will dictate their terms and we'll accept, we've jus pissed them all off and they'll make us pay. Tory reshuffle or GE, some crazy bastard has to push the button bend over and well you know the rest....lets just say he should take his own lube to these negotiations
I'm of the belief that he shat in a sandwich and then handed that shitty sandwich to Gove and Johnson, which is why they looked so sombre and downbeat during their victory speech.
billynoguts (28th June 2016), Mule (28th June 2016)
For me, voting for no confidence is a distraction we can do without along with the Labour party tussle (who the fook cares anyway). We need to crack on with the inevitable and make good with what we have. Cameron has done what most people expected him to do although it would have been better for him in my opinion if he had shown leadership and activated article 50. It looks like he was hoping for the EU would "give us another chance" but has left him looking a muppet.
Social Networking Bookmarks