Your post said a fortune was being saved.
But you cannot say where? You do not know where?
So surely it is you parroting what you are being told by a bunch of politicians.
What has the ECHR done that “shackles us”?
English countryside place soon to be turned into a Socialist style urbanisation.
Oh you really are desperate to score more ‘‘Franglais points’’ and win an argument…you are focusing now on terminology and taking it literally…pathetic little man.
So remind me next time I have a particularly long or good week at work, not to tell you ’ I have made a fortune this week’’
Being that an actual ‘‘fortune’’ is around a million quid, you will be asking to see my payslip as proof.
And God forbid if I say something like… ‘Anymore of that and I’ll kill him’’ or you ll be having the Old Bill on speed dial.
Get a life man.
You are joking right?
From a man who likes to put it across you are up to the minute on news and current affairs,.an armchair pound shop politician in fact?
Maybe you should knock the BBC on the head for biased news source mate.
There are numerous cases where the ECHR have defied both common justice and common sense.
I aint going to comply to your stupidity and obtuse for effect stance by listing cases…do some research.
Btw the ECHR is bound to be detrimental to the UK…
The clue is in the first word…’ '‘European’'
So your post that RefUK Ltd were going to save the UK “a fortune” was exaggeration? hyperbole? a load of bollox? the thoughtless repetition of claims made by a bunch of politicians?
It isn’t half of a percent of a fortune.
To find what you describe as “a fortune” it would need 500 or more of these savings.
I am on this forum asking you what you think because you posted that the “ECHR have shackled the UK”.
That is how forums work.
If I want I can raid the www and find cases concerning the ECHR. How would I know which ones you are referring to?
You have said they shackle the UK. Which ones?
Or is this another case of parroting the claims of politicians?
Of course!
No need for examples, nor evidence of any kind then.
And there we have it.
Take a guess, lets start with all the foreign criminals and/or illegal immigrants that have been allowed to stay here because of ECHR rulings
Yeah you have, and I have adequately explained ’ ‘‘what I think’’ …but you continue to appear to misunderstand for effect…as usual.
Ok, ..So you suitably choose to ignore my post where I mention the ‘‘50p’’, the ‘‘Fortunes are there for the taking’’ and how the country are ‘‘sick of lefty pathetic woke politics’’ , as an explanation.
Too close to home and hard to bear for you maybe?
Instead you use pedantry of terminology as some kind of petty childish ‘tactic’ and ask me for specific figures and stats, to feed your fantasy of being some kind of authoriative politician…
Like I said do your searching for links yourself, I am not going to indulge you…they are out there for the viewing from numerous sources.
I am not going to trawl the net for actual specifics just to pacify YOU…
So interpret that as you will, in whichever way it suits your pathetic agenda…of ‘‘how a forum works’’.
Then go away and no doubt basque in glory of self perception of ‘‘winning another argument on Trucknet’’ …as I have said…you are pathetic little man who should get a life.
Instead of continuously trying to defend the indefensible of this govt, in your Comical Ali style, you should spend your time looking what is actually going on around you, and stop ignoring the damage that is being done to your country,
(Prediction quote Franglais ; ‘‘WHAT damage is being done to our country’’ )
…maybe in the way where you you have no problem doing in your lambasting of Trump and the US…and the quality in which you excelled in when the Tories were in power.
Not so much now though we all notice, because your brainwashing prevents you from displaying a modicum of disapproval of how our country is being both derided by others and and ruined by your type of politics.
We have now unfortunately arrived at the stage where I post the parting shot from Billy, I am done with you for the moment, you bore me…
The ECHR does have some control over some deportations.
Quote: “The European Court of Human Rights can block deportations only in cases where there is evidence that a person can suffer very serious harm by being returned to a third country,” Ilias Trispiotis, professor of human rights law at the University of Leeds, told EuroVerify.
“The second reason, and perhaps even more important reason why that claim is false, is that the legal principle of non-refoulement is not just based on the ECHR,” he added. “It is a core principle of international law.”
Leaving the ECHR would make little difference.
And I thought you have previously said that you support those who are at physical risk having asylum? Y’know those who are here for safety.
As an aside the ECHR is not part of the EU.
The only countries outside the EHCR it are Russia and Belarus who were expelled after the invasion of Ukraine. I really do not think we should align with them.
Leaving the ECHR would still leave the UK inside the UN which also has rules about deprotation of vulnerable people.
Of course some politicians and media are spreading lies and spin about the EHCR and selling simple solutions to difficult problems…Was it never so?
“If you vote for me, I promise an easy answer, etc, etc”
The “fortunes are there for the taking” ?
So why are they taking a grand or two and no more?
You are again listening to spin and politicians lies. You are repeating the party line whilst providing no evidence.
“Vote for me and I will save millions”
Again politicians and some media offering quick and easy fixes.
And here you are…spending time with me…
More ethnic cleansing that the whinging lefties say they are against…
for those that cant be arsed to watch the video here are the bare stats
72 schools dont have any white british children
454 schools less than 2% are white british children.
8,037 schools white british children are a minority.
that means 8,573 schools white british children are the minority. I know some on here have an issue with percentages and basic maths skills however, that equates to 26.63% of schools.
Well at least it has given you the opportunity to showboat your political prowess and knowledge eh?
As for spending time with you? 
As we have established before if ever I had the misfortune to do that, I would be seeing the real you, as opposed to the brave mouthy over confident persona…put it this way I would hazard a bet you wouldn’t be blowing me any kisses for starters.
Ah! The Telegraph article! Based on a piece by Matt Goodwin.
I saw a YT referring to this earlier in the week.
You do realise (actually I doubt you do) that the article has a rather peculiar definition of “white British children”?
In order to make headlines, rather than be clear and accurate, according to the article our own @robroy has (I believe from his posts) children who are not “white British”.
St Nigel of Florida has children who are not white British also.
It is the once upon a time half way accurate Torygraph spinning and misleading and guess what? GBN jumping on the same bandwagon to mislead the public…again.
https://youtu.be/f9kzPzK6hVo?si=zisdO1znfm6xk6p5
@robroy patriarch of a NON white British family!
(according to @cooper it seems)
The Socialist utopian dream of a combination of Zimbabwe and Yugoslavia.
Starmer fits the bill.
well you must of used a crystal ball then because the article was written yesterday at 12:38 bst. 
its behind a paywall but you can see the time and date of when it was published.
of course i wouldnt expect you to agree its more children for the grooming gangs
Wtf are you slavering about now ?
Before you go any further with this latest crap..
I barely put up with all your false bravado bull ■■■■ aimed at me on here as it is, but do NOT dare to cross the lines of acceptability by insulting or making snide remarks about my family and kids …or it may not end well for you…is that clear enough to penetrate??
Take it as you please.
Try reading what has been written
I even put it in italics.
It is not me making stupid definitions about who is and who isn’t “white British children”, it is Matt Goodwin and the Torygraph. As eve,r they are spinning the facts to fit their own narrative and rouse up the rabble.
I even linked the video where this definition is explained for those who can’t be arsed to read a post before taking offence and going off on one. Seems I wasted my time with that link doesn’t it?
The article ypu link to has a link to the Matt Goodwin article. It quotes in a hyperlink in the article you posted.
The article from Matt Goodwin says children such as those of Farage and @robroy are not “white British”.
In order to make sensationalist headlines the Torygraph, and GBN, which uses, the Tgraph article, which refers to the Goodwin article, which says that in order to be “white British” children must be white and have both white parents born in the UK.
It really is a stupid definition, but these scum bags will do anything to garner clicks and rouse up those whip can’t be arsed to read beyond half of the first paragraph.
[quote=“franglais, post:6754, topic:236118”]
It is not me making stupid definitions about who is and who isn’t “white British children”, it is Matt Goodwin and the Torygraph. As eve,r they are spinning the facts to fit their own narrative and rouse up the rabble.[/quote=]
No it is NOT Matt Goodwin singling ME out and making snide renarks about MY kids in order to make a stupid point though is it…It was YOU!
You mate do not get to even MENTION my kids in order to make one of your petty leftist points…and it is not appreciated coming from somebody like you…trust me on that !
‘‘Explained’’ ?
Spun towards an agenda more like..
Yeah you did waste your time, that deluded and pompous patronising lefty imbecile you follow, regularly post, and favour on those vids is almost as annoying as you.
So in future say what tf you like about me,…we all know it is b/s that is never going to be backed up…but do NOT disrespect my family and kids on here ever again !
Goodwin and the Telegraph say that in order for them to be “white British” kids need both parents to be born in the UK, to be “white British”.
That definition seems to be, in your opinion, wrong?
I said I think it is a “stupid definition” of who is and isn’t “white British”.
We agree…
…
Yet you decide to take umbrage not at those making up these stupid definitions, to push their own agenda, but to take offence at the messenger.
and absolutely nothing to do with the topic.
the topic was kids at school. which was a report from the telegraph written yesterday biased on figures from the department of education released yesterday. not three days ago not some time in the week. It has bugger all to do with Matt Goodwin who has never worked for the telegraph as far as i can see but does work for gb news surprise surprise so public enemy number one obviously.
Because they cant dispute the findings they revert to type and shout racists etc etc and twist the narrative to make themselves look special.
To be fair a 'definition" of identify as Anglo Saxon English and vehemently anti Socialist, including the German Socialist Workers Party, would be a more relevant and a more accurate idea of who’s who.