|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Nov 4, 2016 12:47:29 GMT
Not sure why everyone is getting so hysterical and throwing their toys out the pram. The whole point of voting for Brexit (except for the idiots who thought they were getting rid of foreigners or having more money for the NHS) was to make Parliament the supreme body in the UK. That is what people were voting for, that Parliament gets to make the decisions. Now Parliament gets to make the decision. That's the point. The judges were very clear that they weren't ruling on any element of Brexit, just the principle that Parliament must ratify it. That's all. But of course, too many people would rather have a mad rant at the oppressive powers of the Remainers, or something, than actually follow the rule of law. All pretty unedifying. Surely they are doing just that knowing full well it wont be invoked soon, the people voted ,they voted out therefore the Pm in power at that time should be able to perform the will of the people and invoke article 50. get it done get it done soon. However the judges have now given a ruling that could delay leaving for many years and possibly lead to not leaving at all, and as such is massively anti democratic. Despite whether its a point of law or not it has a massive impact on brexit, more importantly it just shows that in the main people have no power or rights as long as we have overpaid rich people in positions to overrule democratic votes From the judgment: (b) The common ground that the question is justiciable It is agreed on all sides that this is a justiciable question which it is for the courts to decide. It deserves emphasis at the outset that the court in these proceedings is only dealing with a pure question of law. Nothing we say has any bearing on the question of the merits or demerits of a withdrawal by the United Kingdom from the European Union; nor does it have any bearing on government policy, because government policy is not law. The policy to be applied by the executive government and the merits or demerits of withdrawal are matters of political judgement to be resolved through the political process. The legal question is whether the executive government can use the Crown's prerogative powers to give notice of withdrawal. We are not in any way concerned with the use that may be made of the Crown's prerogative power, if such a power can as a matter of law be used in respect of Article 50, or what will follow if the Crown's prerogative powers cannot be so used. |
|
|
|
Post by althepirate on Nov 4, 2016 13:03:50 GMT
Apparently the referendum was organised in an advisory capacity which is news to me and probably everyone that voted.
It will be fascinating to see if MP's align with their constituents or follow their own self interest.
I am pretty sure that most people who voted thought the result of the referendum would be legally binding therefore further parliamentary involvement wouldn't be possible.
Surely this definitely has to change before any further referendums otherwise people wont think its worth voting at all and a referendum will be pointless.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2016 13:05:37 GMT
Edward Heath took the UK into the EC on the back of a Royal Perogative using the basis that Parliament would agree later on.
So, why can't a Royal Perogative be used to get us out?
Parliament had their vote.
In other news, Accrington Stanley are not happy at losing out on promotion through goal difference. They argue that over the course of the season they had a number of good goals disallowed, and conceded some goals that should never have been given. They say that a few stupid, ignorant referees and linesmen were responsible, and that these people didn't really understand what they were doing. Even though Bristol Rovers finished above them in the league table, Accrington feel that if the full facts were revisited, then the football league will take the sensible decision to promote them instead of Bristol Rovers.
|
|
|
|
Post by althepirate on Nov 4, 2016 13:52:32 GMT
Edward Heath took the UK into the EC on the back of a Royal Perogative using the basis that Parliament would agree later on. So, why can't a Royal Perogative be used to get us out? Parliament had their vote. In other news, Accrington Stanley are not happy at losing out on promotion through goal difference. They argue that over the course of the season they had a number of good goals disallowed, and conceded some goals that should never have been given. They say that a few stupid, ignorant referees and linesmen were responsible, and that these people didn't really understand what they were doing. Even though Bristol Rovers finished above them in the league table, Accrington feel that if the full facts were revisited, then the football league will take the sensible decision to promote them instead of Bristol Rovers. Accrington have just said that they will let the people of this country decide and if they don't agree with them they will let Parliament decide and if they don't agree with them then they will make the final decision. That's fair isn't it? I think its called Reverse Democracy. |
|
|
|
Post by William Wilson on Nov 5, 2016 7:59:23 GMT
You are of course correct. What on earth am I, or anyone else doing, questioning the deeds and actions of our superiors. Maybe you're just a bloke on the internet who has trouble putting together your point of view, so you resort to having a pop at the other person? You can question judges if you want, but it's like you don't seem to realise they've been studying law all their lives and actually know what they're doing, whereas you're just whining about a decision you don't like. All well and good, until another lot of judges take a look at a case, decide that the first lot didn`t actually know what they were doing, and overturn them. |
|
|
|
Post by William Wilson on Nov 5, 2016 8:12:13 GMT
I disagree. Parliament have had their vote. They voted by 6 to 1 to hold the Referendum, fully expecting to win the vote. They lost. Parliament is not the supreme body in the UK. That right belongs to the people. "The whole point of voting for Brexit was to make Parliament the supreme body in the UK. That is what people were voting for," - Again I disagree. People were voting to leave the EU. That is what it said on the ballot paper. Nobby, do I take it that you`re not entirely convinced that the braying halfwits we see on our televisions during PMQs, are better suited to deciding our future in Europe, than the 16,000,000 people who voted to leave? |
|
|
|
Post by Centenary Gas on Nov 5, 2016 18:37:23 GMT
Cameron's words before the referendum were to the effect that article 50 would be triggered the following day if Leave won. He obviously didn't mean it, nor would it of been the right thing to do. But if that was the assumption, I don't see why Parliament would have to approve it now.
Suprised, pleasantly, that the Government is going after a hard brexit. Sooner the EU destroys itself and we can get back to free trade and nothing more, the better for everyone.
TM should just call a general electrion. Labour would be devastated.
|
|
|
|
Post by William Wilson on Nov 6, 2016 11:20:12 GMT
Cameron's words before the referendum were to the effect that article 50 would be triggered the following day if Leave won. He obviously didn't mean it, nor would it of been the right thing to do. But if that was the assumption, I don't see why Parliament would have to approve it now. Suprised, pleasantly, that the Government is going after a hard brexit. Sooner the EU destroys itself and we can get back to free trade and nothing more, the better for everyone. TM should just call a general electrion. Labour would be devastated. She must have conflicting thoughts on the subject. Of course she`d like a larger Parliamentary majority; on the other hand, who wouldn`t want to keep Jeremy Corbyn in place? If Labour were trounced at an election, Corbyn would most likely be replaced by someone like Dan Jarvis, who would command more respect and give May a harder time. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2016 22:07:28 GMT
So, we have:
- A government which lie to the public about the nature of the vote.
- Politicians who are trying to deliberately pervert the course of the political process because they don't agree with it.
- The same politicians who happily signed Lisbon treaty and others, with NO consultation.
- A public broadcaster who clearly spread disinformation. A broadcaster who have beached their own charter by accepting money from the EU.
- A corrupt, utterly corrupted media and establishment who hold contrary views to the democratic majority, and assume the right to rule, as opposed to the duty to represent.
If someone asked you "what would you do if you could see democracy slipping to a dictatorship" I am sure everyone would honestly believe they would resist it.
Well, it's here. Listen to the things Assange is leaking.
So what do we do? We know it will be delayed and kicked on until they can fund the campaign enough, make enough people dependent on the EU, or just wait a few years for a few more "correctly educated" kids come out of the cheap imitation of a public education system we have, and a few more of the generation who retained some value and self respect die off? That's what they are doing. Snidey, cheap duplicitous bastards.
No shame, no morals, our way over yours. Bigotry in action.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2016 2:16:25 GMT
So, we have: - A government which lie to the public about the nature of the vote. - Politicians who are trying to deliberately pervert the course of the political process because they don't agree with it. - The same politicians who happily signed Lisbon treaty and others, with NO consultation. - A public broadcaster who clearly spread disinformation. A broadcaster who have beached their own charter by accepting money from the EU. - A corrupt, utterly corrupted media and establishment who hold contrary views to the democratic majority, and assume the right to rule, as opposed to the duty to represent. If someone asked you "what would you do if you could see democracy slipping to a dictatorship" I am sure everyone would honestly believe they would resist it. Well, it's here. Listen to the things Assange is leaking. So what do we do? We know it will be delayed and kicked on until they can fund the campaign enough, make enough people dependent on the EU, or just wait a few years for a few more "correctly educated" kids come out of the cheap imitation of a public education system we have, and a few more of the generation who retained some value and self respect die off? That's what they are doing. Snidey, cheap duplicitous bastards. No shame, no morals, our way over yours. Bigotry in action. You sound as though you'd join me with a pitchfork and some piano wire outside of Paliament. Loads of lamposts in the area. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2016 6:40:16 GMT
So, we have: - A government which lie to the public about the nature of the vote. - Politicians who are trying to deliberately pervert the course of the political process because they don't agree with it. - The same politicians who happily signed Lisbon treaty and others, with NO consultation. - A public broadcaster who clearly spread disinformation. A broadcaster who have beached their own charter by accepting money from the EU. - A corrupt, utterly corrupted media and establishment who hold contrary views to the democratic majority, and assume the right to rule, as opposed to the duty to represent. If someone asked you "what would you do if you could see democracy slipping to a dictatorship" I am sure everyone would honestly believe they would resist it. Well, it's here. Listen to the things Assange is leaking. So what do we do? We know it will be delayed and kicked on until they can fund the campaign enough, make enough people dependent on the EU, or just wait a few years for a few more "correctly educated" kids come out of the cheap imitation of a public education system we have, and a few more of the generation who retained some value and self respect die off? That's what they are doing. Snidey, cheap duplicitous bastards. No shame, no morals, our way over yours. Bigotry in action. You sound as though you'd join me with a pitchfork and some piano wire outside of Paliament. Loads of lamposts in the area. To be honest mate the politicians are a small part of the problem. The problem is mainly with the media and education system. I would like to see some fundamental changes: a complete root and branch review of university educators, the banning of politics from campus education. Most importantly, the outright banning of all gender studies and associated subjects, which are overtly political and mainly pseudo science, and completely and utterly useless. All education to focus exclusively on knowledge and skills bases which have real life applications. Social services would get a review too...seeing as a UKIP couple got barred from fostering kids, there's clearly a lot of unwanted politics in there too. Then the media, what can I say? All newspapers must stand up under customer revenue and can NOT be funded by a 3rd party indefinitely. Guardian, Independent etc are all funded by foreign owners for propoganda purposes - they make no money, they lose money. All the papers which make money actually represent the views of the public. In writing this, there is a clear pattern emerging. It seems those institutions which are free of going bust or have no real consequences for underperformance and little scrutiny of accounts seem to be the ones shaping us towards the EU, and it's progressive cause. One could think they have a lot of time to think about their "theories" and devote so much time no political agendas. Or perhaps they're paid too. I would like to add there are many, many exceptions to the rule, but anyone who's been around either journalists or educators knows that a Brexiteer or cons/UKIP voter is about as unwelcome as a horny dog at a knobbly knees contest. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2016 7:17:27 GMT
I think we are seeing an extension of the Brexit vote with the election of Trump.
Clinton kept talking about her "twenty years of experience in public service", and basically people just thought, "oh sh**, more of the same old same old".
They voted for Trump not because they thought he was better, but it was because he wasn't the 'same old same old' that Clinton represents.
With the Brexit vote, we were pressured by the Government. Big banks and big business were telling us what was good for us.......and people are watered off with the 'same old same old'. We are seeing that the political elite still hasn't got the message, especially with the Remainers and their belief that they can get their way, despite the mandate that has been delivered by the people. Every day the Brexit is delayed by the Remainers, is just more votes heading the way of other parties, like UKIP. In Germany, it's the AfD that has come from nowhere to start polling at 20% of the popular vote. In France, will Le Pen now get in? People have had enough of the old established system and politicians.
The world is slowly changing and the old guard have no answers.
I totally agree with your post by the way. The Guardian being amongst the biggest hypocrites, as it is based in the Caymen Islands and doesn't pay a penny in tax in the UK.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2016 10:01:51 GMT
I hear that Tony Blair has called for a re-vote in the US, and he's also offered his personal services as a Peacemaker.
Ha, ha, I've pinched the following from somebody else, but it's brills......
"The left has waited decades for a revolution against the corrupt political establishment. It's been hoping for one, predicting one, praying for one, promising one and threatening one for generations.
And then, when two come along in the same year, it finds itself on the side of the bankers, the side of the vested interests, the side of the globalists, the side of the corporations, the side of the media, the side of the status Dam quo, the side of the Dam losers.
And to make their defeat even more bitter they have identified white, working class men as those chiefly responsible for their defeats.
Absolutely, Dam, glorious!"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2016 10:11:13 GMT
Nicola Sturgeon has led demands that the people of Scotland be consulted on this result. She says that it is their Democratic Right.
|
|
|
|
Post by William Wilson on Nov 9, 2016 12:15:41 GMT
At least Hilary now has something in common with Monica. They`ve both blown it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2016 12:19:53 GMT
At least Hilary now has something in common with Monica. They`ve both blown it. I do believe that Monica blew it more than once though. |
|
|
|
Post by William Wilson on Nov 9, 2016 19:53:43 GMT
At least Hilary now has something in common with Monica. They`ve both blown it. I do believe that Monica blew it more than once though. And she was Jewish too. They`re not supposed to eat pork. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2016 21:08:34 GMT
I hear that Tony Blair has called for a re-vote in the US, and he's also offered his personal services as a Peacemaker. Ha, ha, I've pinched the following from somebody else, but it's brills...... "The left has waited decades for a revolution against the corrupt political establishment. It's been hoping for one, predicting one, praying for one, promising one and threatening one for generations. And then, when two come along in the same year, it finds itself on the side of the bankers, the side of the vested interests, the side of the globalists, the side of the corporations, the side of the media, the side of the status f**king quo, the side of the f**king losers. And to make their defeat even more bitter they have identified white, working class men as those chiefly responsible for their defeats. Absolutely, f**king, glorious!" All hail this comment, well knicked Sir and it's about the best I have read! |
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Nov 9, 2016 21:10:46 GMT
The whole world rests easy now the liberal establishment and their namby-pamby values have been cast aside by "the people".
I'm confident that a Putin-Trump alliance will deliver a lot of actiion.
|
|
|
|
Post by William Wilson on Nov 10, 2016 7:58:54 GMT
The whole world rests easy now the liberal establishment and their namby-pamby values have been cast aside by "the people". I'm confident that a Putin-Trump alliance will deliver a lot of actiion. One way or another, I think your confidence is well placed. |
|
