peteblue
Welcome back Wayne
What on Earth do you mean by this?
I mean they were all legally enacted applications of violence......
What on Earth do you mean by this?
If that happened the division of those assets would be the least of people's worries.
So, your violence is okay but other people's violence, unless ratified by somebody that you approve of, is not? By the way, I am part of no gang. I call it as I see it. Mark's capable of looking after himself, I presume, especially against the likes of you. Your bleating remains pathetic and constant........Well, once again it would be nice if he could answer on his own, but seeing as the gang are all here I will answer first. I am in favour of legal violence if it has been legally approved. WW1 and WW2, Falklands etc were all legally enacted applications of violence.....perhaps you could give him a nudge to answer the question I posed to him......
This is an incredibly simplistic notion of the laws of war.I mean they were all legally enacted applications of violence......
I've answered you Pete.So still no answer then.....
So, your violence is okay but other people's violence, unless ratified by somebody that you approve of, is not? By the way, I am part of no gang. I call it as I see it. Mark's capable of looking after himself, I presume, especially against the likes of you. Your bleating remains pathetic and constant........
I've answered you Pete.
I notice you haven't answered who owns the UK or the USA despite being asked 3 times.
Erm...It’s either legal or it is not. Do you believe in the rule of Law ?......
I do. As did the victims of Bloody Sunday and the Ballymurphy killings, and many others in Ireland besides. Legal killings? They're okay aren't they? Pathetic.....It’s either legal or it is not. Do you believe in the rule of Law ?......
'The people I suppose'I did actually answer that question to another poster a page or so back......
It's quite simple Emlyn.So, your violence is okay but other people's violence, unless ratified by somebody that you approve of, is not? By the way, I am part of no gang. I call it as I see it. Mark's capable of looking after himself, I presume, especially against the likes of you. Your bleating remains pathetic and constant........
It's quite simple Emlyn.
He was asked by a moderator to desist from posting in the Irish border thread due to the antagonism he was causing by his aggressive posting.
Unable to contain his bigotry, he has decided to continue it in this thread which is totally inappropriate considering most contributors to this thread are not interested in that subject.
Not a chance I'm rising to his bait by answering his questions which are irrelevant to this EU thread and completely off topic.
He is a troll of the highest order. People need to stop biting.
I actually think that most Leavers would have accepted a leave position where we were out of Brussels control. But since the EU really stitched us up, and the Remainer groups have done everything to reverse the decision, I think Leavers have just hardened their position......
Everyone has hardened their position. Which is the main problem.
I voted remain and my personal red line of being happy with a deal would be maintaining freedom of movement.
I’ve thought for a long time that the best result would be to negotiate a bespoke Norway style deal, probably outside of EFTA in which we maintain single market access and membership of customs union. We cut all political ties, but don’t set fire to the economy or erect a border in Ireland.
This would now be my preferred option even over remain. No matter how stupid I or others may think it was - to leave such a complicated question to such a simplistic referendum - it happened and we can’t ignore that.
I think the above solution listens to the voices of the 52% that voted out, but also recognises how close a vote it was.
Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.