Wes Tender

Those who have already bought the Bilbao tickets, also get the other match free, using the same ticket. Good news.

What you've done is either twisted something I wrote, or deliberately read something into it that wasn't intended, to discredit me. You're like a dog with a bone. I don't believe that you would prefer to concentrate on the post-Brexit debate when you would much prefer to indulge in your snide attempts to belittle anybody who doesn't share your opinions. What the mods ought to be doing is to stop the puerile name-calling by you, Fry and Shurlock.

You believe what you want to and as per normal, assume the position of supercilious arrogance that no doubt helps makes you feel superior. The problem with your argument about having one for Remain and one for Leave and an independent analyst/expert, comes when that independent analyst / expert was too often for Remain, but this seems to have escaped your notice. Balance would have an independent expert/analyst championing each side. But thanks for putting me right that my gratitude for the result to Leave the EU should be directed towards the BBC

No, thank you, mate for posting that link. It has produced no end of amusement for the ironies contained within. Patten of course, was one of those failed MPs who enjoyed 5 years on the EU gravy train as a Commissioner, as well as being Trust Chairman of the Beeb. No doubt he declared these interests in order that his comments would be taken not to be impartial. Speaking on Radio Four's Today programme about the need for the Beeb to be seen as impartial about the Referendum because its charter was coming up for renewal, he managed in his interview to press the case for the UK remaining in the EU by several remarks. His position is immediately identified as pro-Remain. He added weight to the statements made for Remain by the Governor of the Bank of England and the IMF and suggested that anybody who stated a counter argument should only be allotted equal air time if they were as prominent in a professional capacity. He then predicted a Remain win and called on the Conservative Party to unite afterwards. He urged the Leave camp “not to go down the Alex Salmond route” of refusing to accept that a constitutional question has been settled by a referendum." This is all delicious stuff.

Evidence? A simple bit of Googling will bring you up much opinion as to where the Beeb was biased in favour of remain. It should not be too difficult for somebody of your super intellect to do a simple bit of research like this. Here are a few to be going on with:- https://www.google.co.uk/#q=bbc+biased+towards+remain Now, I accept that of course you will dismiss much of this comment because some of it is produced by bodies or organisations that you consider beneath contempt in your opinion, but naturally you will therefore point out where these reports were not justified, and produce your counter evidence of the complaints of BBC bias towards the Leave campaign, in the interests of balance. Regarding the salivate comment, of course I referred to the programme editors, producers or commentators, but of course you knew that. Regarding your assertion that I must be anti-Semitic, time to set that straight before you continue ad nauseam with the accusation in the same way that you label me as a UKIP supporter when I have been a life long Conservative. I have been pro-Israeli since the 6 day War and rather lukewarm when it comes to finding much to like or admire about the Arabs. Not that I expect you to grow up and cease this playground name-calling.

I always wondered what you looked like, but I'm happy that you have given my post the big thumbs-up, mate.

Far more likely that in that sort of time scale, there will have been referenda from other member states following us out and the collapse of the Euro. The negotiations with trade within the Single Market will undoubtedly be difficult, but there is no evidence to suggest that we will be unsuccessful in concluding major trade deals with the growth economies of the World. It is far too early to make a reasoned judgement on that anyway, but the earliest indications are that we would get a very positive response to our negotiations with several of the big players. Believing that the electorate would vote to rejoin the EU conditional on us joining the Eurozone, signing the Schengen agreement and paying through our noses for our membership is just plain barmy. If it came to the whole European project being on the verge of collapse and consequently being forced away from the federal entity it has evolved into and back towards something more akin to the Common Market we originally joined, then we might well consider rejoining that.

There was plenty of stuff on the TV about the implications either way in the months before the clamp-down in the comparatively short time before the actual polling day. The BBC in particular had their remain propaganda going full tilt up until then, the News programme salivating over every report from some economist or business group about the financial Armageddon that would ensue if we left. Besides, if anybody wished to educate themselves about the arguments either way, they could easily have read a plethora of information on the internet, discounted the bias factor favouring the group publishing those views and then arrived at their own conclusions. The electorate had months to do this and it is really weak of the remain side to push this agenda that they did not have enough information available to make a reasoned judgement. There has also been post-Brexit analysis of why the Remain campaign failed, despite having arguably the stronger position and the backing of the PM and Chancellor, and £9 million pounds of Government propaganda paid for by us. One of the main conclusions was not that Remain had been unsuccessful in putting out enough information about the implications of leaving the EU, but that its campaign had been so negative and seemingly exaggerated.

Quite right. Two thirds of a sample poll of 1004 voters they contacted, not two thirds of voters. And apart from the problems of targeting a representative cross section, the responses depend on the phrasing of the question. One would have expected that after the pollsters had been wrong so often recently, that nobody would pay too much attention to them, especially one commissioned for the BBC. And deep joy, a campaign to remain in the Single Market to go with the incessant petitioning and demonstrations. What a shame for them that there wasn't all this activity by the Remainians during the Referendum, or they might have actually achieved a majority.

Split infinitive, "It has never been that great."

Great to hear this. There is going to be so much disappointment in Skate Land.

That's a shame

Of course I read the article, but the Guardian needs to have words with their headline writer, don't they? That clearly stated that a Brexit would trigger a UK recession. Not could, or might, but would. But then again, it is the Guardian, so one ought to take what they say with a pinch of salt, eh, pal?

Straws are being clutched here in an attempt to save face. How could it possibly mean that Article 50 would be enacted then, when the referendum result was only declared on 24th June? Davis was clearly talking about the end of this year, or the beginning of next year, as was the advisor in his department. As you say, it is not a big issue, but why do you deem it odd that I would argue the toss about it when you denigrate me as lacking the ability to comprehend such a simple concept again

The Guardian obviously misread what the IMF predicted https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jun/18/imf-says-brexit-would-trigger-uk-recession-eu-referendum

Before the end of 2016, or the start of 2017? We are talking December this year or early 2017, are we not?

So David Davis' Department has told the Court that article 50 won't/can't be triggered before the end of the year and David Davis said last week Brexit would be triggered "before or by the start of next year". So where has the comprehension thing gone awry, Tinny?

Does it? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-uk-leaves-the-eu-36802756

It's amazing how current much of this is still today:-

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jul/18/arm-holdings-to-be-sold-to-japans-softbank-for-234bn-reports-say Swings and roundabouts

The possibility that Scotland might leave the Union was already raised in the Referendum debate, as was World War 3, financial meltdown and Armageddon and yet the electorate still decided to Leave. I am amused by your belief that it would be a "simple" vote if the options were just to remain in the EU or to split up the Union if we voted to leave the EU. The simple vote was remain or leave and anything else would be an unfair, unreasonable or unnecessary complication. Conversely, now that the UK has voted to leave the EU, I presume that Scotland and the rest of the UK will be happy that new trade deals will be negotiated on behalf of the entire UK, not just parts of it?

http://uk.businessinsider.com/brexit-why-scotland-will-not-get-an-independence-referendum-2016-6 Several good reasons why it will be very difficult for Scotland to arrange another Independence Referendum, let alone have the stomach for one if they got it.

This scenario appears to be a figment of your imagination, but I'm happy for you that nevertheless it entertains you. Where has this connection been made between land mass, population and GDP apart from by this Chris Cook, quoting from your favourite reliable source, an article in the Daily Express?

All it would require is a reasonable grasp of World geography to express an opinion along those lines. Indulge yourself in your puerile fantasies if it amuses you, or counter the basis of the argument with the more precise figures that are already in your head, so that you won't need to research them yourself to disprove them.

Nice to see the forum's most vocal Remainians getting their knickers in a twist at the reports that we are forging ahead with planning our future trade deals with some of the more dynamic countries of the World.