Yet again she blames others for not passing her dreadful deal, blames Labour for not agreeing to get it through, refuses to see that millions want to Stop Brexit and then tells Corbyn to help her deal through by saying future Prime Ministers will change it anyway. The woman is seriously mad.

Full agreement,and do not be surprised if she and Corbyn are scared into doing a deal after the rise of the new Brexit Party...one I doubt will get enough support to pass...but who knows?

A good evening Sir.

They should just do a deal and honour the result of the referendum. People voted to leave because they wanted to, not because they read a sign on the side of a bus, or because Michael Gove told them to. They voted either to control immigration (the country is overcrowded) or as a protest against the establishment. Be true to yourself Jeremy and don't support a second referendum (a loser's vote). I supported remain in the referendum, but also support democracy.

robbiex wrote:
They should just do a deal and honour the result of the referendum. People voted to leave because they wanted to, not because they read a sign on the side of a bus, or because Michael Gove told them to. They voted either to control immigration (the country is overcrowded) or as a protest against the establishment. Be true to yourself Jeremy and don't support a second referendum (a loser's vote). I supported remain in the referendum, but also support democracy.

Democracy is the key....play around with it at your peril!

Silliest post of the decade, next to Brexit means Brexit.

JK2006 wrote:
Silliest post of the decade, next to Brexit means Brexit.

What else would Brexit mean Doctor King?

I always thought the silliest posts on here were some of your economic predictions pre Brexit....or perhaps the crazy notion we need to join the euro currency.....

....I notice arch remainer and peoples vote campaigner Anna Sudbury has joined the campaign against victims phone disclosure to the police....quite happy to mess with both democracy and the right to a fair trial....need I say more about democracy?

A good morning to you Sir.

You and MadMay both fall for the same simplistic crap; Brexit (a meaningless word) is a complex situation meaning extricating a country from a legally binding commitment without breaking international law. So it is not just simply "leaving the EU". We have contractual details to sort out. And the never easy solution will not satisfy those who want an immediate, total, simplistic break (illegal). Nor those who believe, as I do, we should remain and improve the system. It should never have been a referendum of Yes or No; the ramifications are far more complicated. Only simplistic morons cannot see that.

Silent Minority wrote:
JK2006 wrote:
Silliest post of the decade, next to Brexit means Brexit.

What else would Brexit mean Doctor King?

I always thought the silliest posts on here were some of your economic predictions pre Brexit....or perhaps the crazy notion we need to join the euro currency.....

....I notice arch remainer and peoples vote campaigner Anna Sudbury has joined the campaign against victims phone disclosure to the police....quite happy to mess with both democracy and the right to a fair trial....need I say more about democracy?

A good morning to you Sir.


I don't think that it is fair that you should have to disclose the contents of your phone when you make a claim of sexual assault or other crimes against someone. If the complainant says that they have had communication, then only then should their personal data be looked into, not as a matter of course. the accuser and accused may never have had any communication before the alleged offence, in this instance there is no reason why they should look into personal data. This is a digital strip search, and would cost £1000s in police resources.

JK2006 wrote:
You and MadMay both fall for the same simplistic crap; Brexit (a meaningless word) is a complex situation meaning extricating a country from a legally binding commitment without breaking international law. So it is not just simply "leaving the EU". We have contractual details to sort out. And the never easy solution will not satisfy those who want an immediate, total, simplistic break (illegal). Nor those who believe, as I do, we should remain and improve the system. It should never have been a referendum of Yes or No; the ramifications are far more complicated. Only simplistic morons cannot see that.

I imagined that the withdrawal would be gradual, over twenty years or so to minimise disruption.

The referendum was indeed more complicated than yes or no.
My "instinct" would be to eventually leave, because I believe The EU is inherently racist and corrupt. It would be no use voting for that, though, unless everyone had the same reason and we were working towards the same end. Otherwise my "anti racist" reason could result in people being "sent home"

I cant see a repeat of the vote being any clearer, because the question will still be yes or no.
A thousand reasons cant have one solution.

Theresa May comes across as being power crazed and off her trolley. She wants locking up!