Well obviously Group B. But in the case of Brexit, their âjobâ was an evil, amoral one. To con people into believing their lies and to vote for something that Group B knew full well would be bad for our country and our people, while personally benefiting Group B
Just because you do a job effectively doesnât mean the job should have been done or bring you any credit if the job you did effectively was designed to do harm
But that doesnât excuse the stupidity of the people who fell for the snake oils salesmenâs con tricks
Nor was it the fault of Group A who couldnât convince them they were being conned
Thereâs none so blind as those who will not see and the easiest people to pull a long con on are those who want to believe the con artist
Group B exploited the worst of human nature and xenophobia to manipulate and those who fell for it wanted to
Because those who saw through it were too arrogant and lazy to make the effort to help everyone see through it. How many people did you try to keep on the straight and narrow?
(Iâll leave it to you and others to battle out which side is ârightâ or âwrongâ, as per the usual Brexit debates).
@Omah , deepest apologies. This is all completely off topic. @Azz ⊠Can you split and/or remove the (ir)relevant posts.
Sorry again
Mmmm, I suspect you are apologising for off topic and asking for the posts to be removed as a tactic to have the last word after âcan we agree to differâ didnât work! Going for the moral high ground? You can be quite controlling, I think
Believe me, I tried to get many, many people to see sense and Iâm still trying.
And it wasnât the arrogance and laziness of the those who saw through the lies that that stopped the others seeing through it, it was their own arrogance and laziness in choosing to believe the lies because it suited their own prejudices
Anyway, yes, off topic for the thread and boring for everyone else, so Iâll leave it for now, split, delete and flag posts as you will, there will be other Brexit threads and other forums
Seriously though, I glanced up at the thread title and, knowing that the op is not usually overly keen on deviations (as is his prerogative, fair enough), thought it appropriate to ask to have it moved.
Iâm happy to continue to defeat you in debate, if thatâs what floats your boat
Iâm wondering what Liz Trussâs husband and 2 teenage daughters think about all this ding doing their mother/wife is going through. It must effect them as well.
âHuge honour to be prime ministerâ, Truss says
Stepping up to the podium outside Downing Street, Liz Truss says it was a âhuge honour to be prime ministerâ.
She says her government âacted urgently and decisively on the side of hardworking families and businessesâ.
âFrom my time as prime minister, I am more convinced than ever that we need to be bold,â she says.
The outgoing prime minister trips up slightly as she quotes the Roman philosopher Seneca.
Looking ahead to the future, she says the UK âcannot afford to be a low growth countryâ and that âwe need to take advantage of our Brexit freedomsâ.
She adds that the country should continue to support Ukraine.
âI wish Rishi Sunak every success for the country,â she says, thanking those who helped her.
She ends her speech by saying: âI believe in the British people, and I know that brighter days lie ahead.â
Her speech lasts three minutes and six seconds in total - making it a little longer than her 90-second resignation speech.
Trussâs valedictory address was striking for its defiance: her programme for government proved disastrous, but she was insistent that its core aim, turbo charging economic growth, was the right goal at the right time.
Trickle-Down Truss retreats to Planet dÉȘËluËÊ(É)n âŠ