The 'I told you so' EU referendum - Officially the Worst Thread Ever

[A11M11]

Pork meat as a whole maybe but bacon specifically is more U.K oriented

[Jock Gooner]

How is it irrelevant? The cornerstone of our democracy is built around the sovereignty of Parliament. It’s Parliament that decides the laws of this country. Again I reiterate, the Brexit argument relentlessly banged the “bring back control” drum.

So when a Prime Minister deliberately closes Parliament down that just smacks of double standards in my book. Not forgetting he is breaking UK law.

Blame Theresa May for coming back with a dud deal, and Boris Johnson who claimed he would get a deal but has no intention of doing so and is just counting down the clock trying every dirty trick along the way.

Irrelevant because democracy comes from the people first. It's a bit like policing which is conducted with the consent of the public rather than the state. Many of our MPs are deciding their own Brexit position irrelevant of what their constituencies voted. My constituency is Leave yet our MP is one of the rebel twats who went against the govt and quite rightly got booted. We elect him to represent us not himself. So if Parliament want to ignore the wishes of those who voted for them then they are bringing about this shitfest themselves. If we don't leave then why should I listen to anything that the state tells me to do in future - all bets are off at that point because the wanky liberal elite think that they can try and ignore the result.

Boris knows that the only way to screw a deal out of the EU is to play hardball with the fu.ckers. We might end up leaving without a deal to call their bluff but a deal will be done pretty quickly thereafter. All this poncing about over Ireland is effectively bullshit. Unfortunately we have to hit them with economic reality to overcome their federalist ideology which is what this is all about....oh and our money! Pathetic.

You're looking at it the wrong way round, the people advise who they want to manage the country in the form of elections. The politicians are given free rein to make decisions on behalf of the people. If Democracy came from the people, explain how a minority government managed to close Parliament down until it was judged unlawful?

In the case of a referendum and again this has been discussed to death, the EU referendum was an indicator, not legally binding. The framework for leaving the EU has to be decided by creating laws under our constitution of Parliament. The original proposal for the referendum didn't come from the people, it was earmarked by David Cameron who was under pressure from the likes of the ERG to have a referendum. He then included it in his 2015 election manifesto.

No mate, you are looking at it from the wrong way which is just as the MPs would like you to think. We vote these clowns in based on the promises of a party manifesto not for them to do as they please once they have our vote in the bag. The fact that they have gone rogue has shown what a pile of shite they all are. They closed Parliament down because Labour wouldn't use the time honoured tradition of calling a confidence vote in the government of the day - that's bleedin obvious. That could have been sorted out before Parliament was prorogued.

It doesn't really matter how the referendum came about - the whole legally binding thing - Jesus give me strength - a losers argument. What it did demonstrate is that rather a lot of people did want to have a say about the EU and rather a lot of people in this country clearly don't buy into a United States of Europe.

But that's the reality of politics in the UK these days, isn't it. The politicians do whatever they want, some out of wanting to stop us leaving the EU others forcing a damaging Brexit, and some to preserve their position of power and careers. This is why so many people including me are so disenfranchised with the current shower of the political parties that are supposed to represent us. If there was an option "none of the above" on the ballot paper it would win by a landslide.

Law is not a question of being a loser's argument, it is what our democracy is built on. Without it, there would be anarchy on the streets.

Brexiteers like you think it's just a question of walking out the door, this isn't something that ends on October 31st, it will take years to unravel.

Politicians doing what they want indeed but that is why we are seeing various MPs facing calls for deselection by their constituents as that is the only democratic option to hold these twonks to account. The 'losers argument' statement was in reponse to your comment about the referendum not being legally binding not 'the law' itself (something I know rather a lot about) - ffs that line has been used to death on here and tbh it's not something I have heard put up as an argument for a long time anywhere else. Move on. It's a bit hard to ignore the freely expressed democratic opinion of over 17M people and still claim to be a democracy. The whole basis of any democracy is the will of the people because as soon as people refuse to accept the system it's fu.cked. As I said before it's the same principle of policing by consent - we 'the people' agree to be policed although most people are completely oblivious to the subtlety of the system.

And your last statement - you don't know what I think so stop trying to put words into my mouth. That has been a major part of the Remain argument, trying to tell leavers what they did or didn't vote for or what they think. The issue with Brexit is if we had turned round to the EU as a united nation and said deal please there wouldn't be all the bollox there is now. But that would require all these 'democrat' types to be democratic but they have shown that they are not. The EU think we are a major pain in the arse but our money is huge and if there is the slightest chance they can keep us locked into their little cartel then they will take it. I can guarantee you that if we left without a deal on 31/10 - which won't happen because the establishment will not let it - then there would be a deal very soon after as the reality began to hit home to some of the smaller countries. Now I'm off as I have broken my own self imposed rule of not posting on this pointless thread again and I am stopping now.

[NickF]

only there won't be a no deal Brexit because there has been a law passed to prevent it.

I thought the Benn Act just means that if a deal has not been passed by Parliament by 19/10 the PM has to ask for an extension.
If/when an extension is granted (i.e. 31 Jan), they would have to do the whole thing again and pass another law blocking a no deal before the next deadline. I don't think a no-deal has actually been permanently blocked.

If an extension is refused (unlikely) wouldn't we just crash out by default on the 31st October?

[Gunner Rob]

only there won't be a no deal Brexit because there has been a law passed to prevent it.

I thought the Benn Act just means that if a deal has not been passed by Parliament by 19/10 the PM has to ask for an extension.
If/when an extension is granted (i.e. 31 Jan), they would have to do the whole thing again and pass another law blocking a no deal before the next deadline. I don't think a no-deal has actually been permanently blocked.

If an extension is refused (unlikely) wouldn't we just crash out by default on the 31st October?

yes but as you say it is unlikely they will refuse an extension

[nut flush gooner]

Irrelevant because democracy comes from the people first. It's a bit like policing which is conducted with the consent of the public rather than the state. Many of our MPs are deciding their own Brexit position irrelevant of what their constituencies voted. My constituency is Leave yet our MP is one of the rebel twats who went against the govt and quite rightly got booted. We elect him to represent us not himself. So if Parliament want to ignore the wishes of those who voted for them then they are bringing about this shitfest themselves. If we don't leave then why should I listen to anything that the state tells me to do in future - all bets are off at that point because the wanky liberal elite think that they can try and ignore the result.

Boris knows that the only way to screw a deal out of the EU is to play hardball with the fu.ckers. We might end up leaving without a deal to call their bluff but a deal will be done pretty quickly thereafter. All this poncing about over Ireland is effectively bullshit. Unfortunately we have to hit them with economic reality to overcome their federalist ideology which is what this is all about....oh and our money! Pathetic.

You're looking at it the wrong way round, the people advise who they want to manage the country in the form of elections. The politicians are given free rein to make decisions on behalf of the people. If Democracy came from the people, explain how a minority government managed to close Parliament down until it was judged unlawful?

In the case of a referendum and again this has been discussed to death, the EU referendum was an indicator, not legally binding. The framework for leaving the EU has to be decided by creating laws under our constitution of Parliament. The original proposal for the referendum didn't come from the people, it was earmarked by David Cameron who was under pressure from the likes of the ERG to have a referendum. He then included it in his 2015 election manifesto.

No mate, you are looking at it from the wrong way which is just as the MPs would like you to think. We vote these clowns in based on the promises of a party manifesto not for them to do as they please once they have our vote in the bag. The fact that they have gone rogue has shown what a pile of shite they all are. They closed Parliament down because Labour wouldn't use the time honoured tradition of calling a confidence vote in the government of the day - that's bleedin obvious. That could have been sorted out before Parliament was prorogued.

It doesn't really matter how the referendum came about - the whole legally binding thing - Jesus give me strength - a losers argument. What it did demonstrate is that rather a lot of people did want to have a say about the EU and rather a lot of people in this country clearly don't buy into a United States of Europe.

But that's the reality of politics in the UK these days, isn't it. The politicians do whatever they want, some out of wanting to stop us leaving the EU others forcing a damaging Brexit, and some to preserve their position of power and careers. This is why so many people including me are so disenfranchised with the current shower of the political parties that are supposed to represent us. If there was an option "none of the above" on the ballot paper it would win by a landslide.

Law is not a question of being a loser's argument, it is what our democracy is built on. Without it, there would be anarchy on the streets.

Brexiteers like you think it's just a question of walking out the door, this isn't something that ends on October 31st, it will take years to unravel.

Politicians doing what they want indeed but that is why we are seeing various MPs facing calls for deselection by their constituents as that is the only democratic option to hold these twonks to account. The 'losers argument' statement was in reponse to your comment about the referendum not being legally binding not 'the law' itself (something I know rather a lot about) - ffs that line has been used to death on here and tbh it's not something I have heard put up as an argument for a long time anywhere else. Move on. It's a bit hard to ignore the freely expressed democratic opinion of over 17M people and still claim to be a democracy. The whole basis of any democracy is the will of the people because as soon as people refuse to accept the system it's fu.cked. As I said before it's the same principle of policing by consent - we 'the people' agree to be policed although most people are completely oblivious to the subtlety of the system.

And your last statement - you don't know what I think so stop trying to put words into my mouth. That has been a major part of the Remain argument, trying to tell leavers what they did or didn't vote for or what they think. The issue with Brexit is if we had turned round to the EU as a united nation and said deal please there wouldn't be all the bollox there is now. But that would require all these 'democrat' types to be democratic but they have shown that they are not. The EU think we are a major pain in the arse but our money is huge and if there is the slightest chance they can keep us locked into their little cartel then they will take it. I can guarantee you that if we left without a deal on 31/10 - which won't happen because the establishment will not let it - then there would be a deal very soon after as the reality began to hit home to some of the smaller countries. Now I'm off as I have broken my own self imposed rule of not posting on this pointless thread again and I am stopping now.

The 'losers argument' statement was in reponse to your comment about the referendum not being legally binding not 'the law' itself (something I know rather a lot about)

Can you elaborate on this please, if you are coming at this from a legal perspective I would like to hear more. We are not talking about democracy but the actual mechanics of whether the Brexit vote was legally binding or not. You say this matter isn't discussed elsewhere, well sorry it is and it's one reason we are in a state of limbo in terms of the interpretation of the directives (or lack of them) from the original referendum.

[Jock Gooner]

The 'losers argument' statement was in reponse to your comment about the referendum not being legally binding not 'the law' itself (something I know rather a lot about)

Can you elaborate on this please, if you are coming at this from a legal perspective I would like to hear more. We are not talking about democracy but the actual mechanics of whether the Brexit vote was legally binding or not. You say this matter isn't discussed elsewhere, well sorry it is and it's one reason we are in a state of limbo in terms of the interpretation of the directives (or lack of them) from the original referendum.

Sorry mate, I will not be elaborating - not ignoring you to be awkward or spiteful but I am refusing to give any more of my time to this subject.

[Gunner Rob]

The 'losers argument' statement was in reponse to your comment about the referendum not being legally binding not 'the law' itself (something I know rather a lot about)

Can you elaborate on this please, if you are coming at this from a legal perspective I would like to hear more. We are not talking about democracy but the actual mechanics of whether the Brexit vote was legally binding or not. You say this matter isn't discussed elsewhere, well sorry it is and it's one reason we are in a state of limbo in terms of the interpretation of the directives (or lack of them) from the original referendum.

Sorry mate, I will not be elaborating - not ignoring you to be awkward or spiteful but I am refusing to give any more of my time to this subject.

Yet your vote and all the other votes from the brainwashed fools mean that the country will be dealing with the fall out from Brexit for years to come.

Any benefits yet ?

[nut flush gooner]

The 'losers argument' statement was in reponse to your comment about the referendum not being legally binding not 'the law' itself (something I know rather a lot about)

Can you elaborate on this please, if you are coming at this from a legal perspective I would like to hear more. We are not talking about democracy but the actual mechanics of whether the Brexit vote was legally binding or not. You say this matter isn't discussed elsewhere, well sorry it is and it's one reason we are in a state of limbo in terms of the interpretation of the directives (or lack of them) from the original referendum.

Sorry mate, I will not be elaborating - not ignoring you to be awkward or spiteful but I am refusing to give any more of my time to this subject.

In that case then because of the lack of clarity I revert to this study. If you would like to make a legal discussion, I am all ears and used to work/network with some pretty well-qualified lawyers in the City not long ago.

https://fullfact.org/europe/was-eu-referendum-advisory/

I don't disagree with your comments about democracy btw. As much as I hate the situation we are in, we have to leave the EU. Not have a half baked version but one that gives us full independence to enforce our sovereignty (even though we haven't been with the prorogation issue). The best solution is to have a structured deal but if that is not possible then a Hard Brexit is inevitable, eventually, Europe will just say fuck it your out, they won't kick the can down the road forever.

Then we can have a true discussion over whether it was the right decision in years to come. I still believe No Deal will be disastrous at all levels for this country, the US won't bail us out with any deal that does anything but suit their own agenda.

[nut flush gooner]

only there won't be a no deal Brexit because there has been a law passed to prevent it.

I thought the Benn Act just means that if a deal has not been passed by Parliament by 19/10 the PM has to ask for an extension.
If/when an extension is granted (i.e. 31 Jan), they would have to do the whole thing again and pass another law blocking a no deal before the next deadline. I don't think a no-deal has actually been permanently blocked.

If an extension is refused (unlikely) wouldn't we just crash out by default on the 31st October?

yes but as you say it is unlikely they will refuse an extension

Boris says he wouldn’t break the law, he would just attempt to use the European Courts to crash us out on the 31st October. He would do this by claiming article 50 rests under EU law were as the Benn Act is enshrined under UK law.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/e ... TLkU?ocid=

This is the political skullduggery Sir John Major is referring to.

Yet again Johnson is going against the taking back control argument by using a legal system that usurps our own, whilst we remain in the EU. This just gets more bizarre.

[A11M11]

Fears for sovereignty as the EU takes over members’ armies

A Nato exercise in Poland. Critics see Nato and the EU as acting hand-in-glove and becoming increasingly two wings of a single military entity

Like other member states, Cyprus has signed up to Pesco which critics say means nations are effectively sub-contracting their militaries out to the EU, thus ceding their sovereignty

By Elias Hazou

A year ago, when the European Union was rolling out its Permanent Structured Cooperation (Pesco), some commentators cautioned that we were witnessing the birth pangs of an EU military structure, an essential ingredient in the creation of a European super-state.

At the time such warnings were waved off as hyperbole or ‘conspiracy theory’. Today, EU leaders – including President Nicos Anastasiades –

In an email, Ellis, director of Strategic Defence Initiatives, told the Sunday Mail:

“I stress that the EU is seeking to unify national militaries under single-point command and control of all defence services in the EU zone. Why create a military or defence industry of its own when the EU can commandeer the existing ones for free?

“The EU will then issue tax bills to pay for what is now its own military structures. Therefore, this is in no way an ‘EU army’ on initial ownership grounds. Besides, we see that all armed services are within the scope of EU military unification.”

He adds: “In the British armed services, this has already been seen to include the Royal Navy, the Royal Marines, the Paras, the special forces, the Army and the Royal Air Force. Only when we call this move by its correct name will policymakers appreciate what has been done under their noses.”

[DB10GOONER]

Fears for sovereignty as the EU takes over members’ armies

A Nato exercise in Poland. Critics see Nato and the EU as acting hand-in-glove and becoming increasingly two wings of a single military entity

Like other member states, Cyprus has signed up to Pesco which critics say means nations are effectively sub-contracting their militaries out to the EU, thus ceding their sovereignty

By Elias Hazou

A year ago, when the European Union was rolling out its Permanent Structured Cooperation (Pesco), some commentators cautioned that we were witnessing the birth pangs of an EU military structure, an essential ingredient in the creation of a European super-state.

At the time such warnings were waved off as hyperbole or ‘conspiracy theory’. Today, EU leaders – including President Nicos Anastasiades –

In an email, Ellis, director of Strategic Defence Initiatives, told the Sunday Mail:

“I stress that the EU is seeking to unify national militaries under single-point command and control of all defence services in the EU zone. Why create a military or defence industry of its own when the EU can commandeer the existing ones for free?

“The EU will then issue tax bills to pay for what is now its own military structures. Therefore, this is in no way an ‘EU army’ on initial ownership grounds. Besides, we see that all armed services are within the scope of EU military unification.”

He adds: “In the British armed services, this has already been seen to include the Royal Navy, the Royal Marines, the Paras, the special forces, the Army and the Royal Air Force. Only when we call this move by its correct name will policymakers appreciate what has been done under their noses.”

Oh dear God. This is just getting embarrassing now.

An exercise.

Jesus the only safe way to run an exercise or a real world operation involving different countries is to use single-point command and control. NATO have done it for decades ffs.

[Gunner Rob]

Fears for sovereignty as the EU takes over members’ armies

A Nato exercise in Poland. Critics see Nato and the EU as acting hand-in-glove and becoming increasingly two wings of a single military entity

Like other member states, Cyprus has signed up to Pesco which critics say means nations are effectively sub-contracting their militaries out to the EU, thus ceding their sovereignty

By Elias Hazou

A year ago, when the European Union was rolling out its Permanent Structured Cooperation (Pesco), some commentators cautioned that we were witnessing the birth pangs of an EU military structure, an essential ingredient in the creation of a European super-state.

At the time such warnings were waved off as hyperbole or ‘conspiracy theory’. Today, EU leaders – including President Nicos Anastasiades –

In an email, Ellis, director of Strategic Defence Initiatives, told the Sunday Mail:

“I stress that the EU is seeking to unify national militaries under single-point command and control of all defence services in the EU zone. Why create a military or defence industry of its own when the EU can commandeer the existing ones for free?

“The EU will then issue tax bills to pay for what is now its own military structures. Therefore, this is in no way an ‘EU army’ on initial ownership grounds. Besides, we see that all armed services are within the scope of EU military unification.”

He adds: “In the British armed services, this has already been seen to include the Royal Navy, the Royal Marines, the Paras, the special forces, the Army and the Royal Air Force. Only when we call this move by its correct name will policymakers appreciate what has been done under their noses.”

couldnt care less about an EU army (not that it will happen anyway.
you know what really bothers me though and that is the end to peace in Northern Ireland.

is Brexit really worth a return to "the troubles" ??
if that happens then there will be a lot of politicians with blood on their hands.

[A11M11]

But It is happening but as usual with all things relating to the E.U by stealth.

I doubt anyone wants to see the troubles return to the Island of Ireland not least the politicians and factions over there .The taking up of arms or not , is really in their hands . The paramilitaries will decide whether they want to and the silent majority are the only ones that can stop them.

[Gunner Rob]

But It is happening but as usual with all things relating to the E.U by stealth.

I doubt anyone wants to see the troubles return to the Island of Ireland not least the politicians and factions over there .The taking up of arms or not , is really in their hands . The paramilitaries will decide whether they want to and the silent majority are the only ones that can stop them.

read this and shut up

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/e ... rly-stupid

[A11M11]

Opinion piece !