rixalex

Advanced Members
  • Content count

    12,384
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3,495 Excellent

About rixalex

  • Rank
    A Live Member

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Previous Fields

  • Location
    City Smoke

Recent Profile Visitors

19,848 profile views
  1. Speaking as a landlord myself, i think she is stupidly chancing her arm and being greedy, assuming you are a decent tenant. Pay her a lesson. Move out.
  2. The precise same argument can be made with regards robblok's remarks about Yingluck. There was nothing at all controversial in what he said. It was all reported in mainstream news at the time. Let's just say, your demand for absolute incontrovertible proof, or something similar, seems somewhat selectively applied.
  3. Who was it that once said: "So no evidence.No link.No reasoned argument.Just second hand assertions and debate winning ace that "everybody knows"." ? So not only everybody knows, but even enemies know too... what, is that like a double debate winning ace?
  4. "...clear that the people want something different..." Clear to whom? The only people who think it is clear that people want something different, are those people who voted to remain, and are clinging on to the desperate hope that people have changed their minds. They may have. They may not have. Nobody has a clue, unless there is another referendum. And then what if there is? What's to say that people won't change their minds again after referendum number two? So then presumably we'll need referendum number three... For goodness sake. Remainers have to accept they lost. Get on board with the decision. If in ten, fifteen years time things have all gone to pot as they tell us it will, and the EU is flourishing, they can say i told you so and the country can go in another direction, but until brexit happens and we all see how the things actually pan out (rather than how they are speculated to pan out), we'll never know.
  5. The decision to have a referendum itself was one that was made by MPs in parliament. MPs, working as you say with their team of experts and with the best interests of the nation in mind, voted in favour of having a referendum. They shouldn't have done that if they planned on ignoring the vote, or suddenly moving the goalposts on what constitutes a win and what doesn't after the vote.
  6. Remainers spend a lot of time complaining about lies and mistruths, and then in the next breath come out with stuff like, "ah yes, but the referendum wasn't legally binding anyway". Staggering dishonesty going on there. If you wanted to argue that the vote was only advisory or indeed that the vote needed a two thirds majority, the time to have done that was before the vote. Doing it after is like losing a football match by a goal to nil and then saying, "ah yes, didn't i mention this... you need to win by a two goal margin to have won and besides, we were only playing for fun weren't we, so the game doesn't really officially count anyway".
  7. Firstly, another referendum would completely undermine our Brexit negotiations because the EU could be completely ruthless with us, knowing that the messier the potential divorce, the more likely Britain ends up reversing its decision and returning with cap in hand... a win win for the EU. Another referendum in the offing pretty much guarantees a bad deal for the UK. Perhaps this is why remainers like the idea. Secondly, regarding your point about clearing the air, supposing that this second referendum goes the way remainers wish it to, with them winning by a small margin, do you really think those who voted leave will simply hold up their hands and accept the loss? Of course they won't. They will justifiably argue that when they won the decision wasn't respected, so why should they respect the second referendum. It will never end. The precedent will have been set for ignoring referendum results.
  8. The government can't continually go back and forth to the people to check that they are following their will. The people were given their opportunity to have their say and be listened to last year. The referendum wasn't sprung out of the blue. People had a good year to listen to all sides of the debate and make their decision. And they did. The majority said leave. That decision has to be final. If it's not, referenda will henceforth be a complete waste of time because whichever way a referendum vote might go, it can subsequently be argued that the people have changed their mind.
  9. I don't believe this urge suddenly came over him for the first time at the age of 58. There is no doubt in my mind that this man has to some degree or other, "messed" with kids before. Such a shame his perverse predilection wasn't outed sooner. There's too much under-the-rug-sweeping and a "letting sleeping dogs lie" type attitude in the rural areas - possibly exists in city areas too - with regards this sort of behaviour. That needs to stop. People have to know, to be taught, that it doesn't matter how much it goes against the grain to report another family member, possibly a respected elder, it has to be done. I'm not so much talking about the poor young victims here, but other older family members who must have some inkling or suspicions as to what is going on. It's their responsibility to stand up and protect those less able to. It's the only way to begin to stop sick creatures such as this man from doing such despicable acts.
  10. 12 years of tirelessly defending True as i recall.
  11. Unless you are psychic it's impossible to know the full implications. Nobody does, not even the "experts". Full speculations is all you'll ever get.
  12. I don't think there are many, bar a few extremists, whose first choice is the hardest possible Brexit. Just because people might not want a hard Brexit, does not mean they want to remain in the EU.
  13. A perpetual cycle of referendums. Wonderful. I have a sneaking suspicion though that once you have the outcome you approve of, your appetite for more referendums might suddenly curiously wane.
  14. There can't be a far clearer picture until the negotiations take place. Until then, it's all speculation. Regarding your pledge to accept the results of another referendum, maybe you would but i'm sure a lot of people wouldn't. Especially if the vote was to remain. You'd then have all the Brexiters doing exactly what the remainers are doing now... argue that the vote was in some way not fair and that another referendum was needed to settle things once and for all. Best out of three. And when we are done with that, how about best out of five? Your idea sets a precedent: one referendum is not enough. It would make every future referendum a complete waste of time, because everyone would know that the outcome of the vote might well be ignored. What's the point in voting if that's the case?
  15. Having a referendum after the negotiations will completely undermine Britain's position in those negotiations, because the EU will know full well that they can afford to play hardball without any repercussions. They'll have our negotiators over a barrel essentially.