[Politics] Brexit

[lawros left foot]

I posted "political expert", did i not, no he is not a judge, top work.

Sorry, I thought it was just the High Court Judges, that you were accusing of corruption, I didn't realise it was the entire political establishment.

And, didn't Gove say that we don't need experts?

 

[Dick Head]

17 million people are wrong but a Guyanan hedge fund lady interested in profits and 3 corrupt eu paid judges are correct ?

 

[pastafarian]

It's clear to see why you voted leave, one reason and one reason only and there lies the reason a small majority voted to leave and why I will never accept the result, which was a guide only and of course should be debated and voted by Parliament. And if we have to follow the lead of the sensible Irish until we get the right result then so be it.
The likes of you had immigration stuffed down your throat and by who, Nigel Farage for gods sake, and who else did you listen to Boris Johnson and Micheal Gove and all 3 did a runner after lying their arses off.
And you expect people to accept the result and trust our dreadful MP's to waltz into Europe and around the world cutting trade deals in our favour.
The youth who were not even allowed to vote were also stitched up by their own grandparents who still think Victoria is on the throne and don't like a different colour skin.
You must be living in cloud cuckoo land but not so smug as you were yesterday, I can only hope that the whole thing implodes and we get to have another go, but I still would not trust the thick and ignorant to make the right decision this time either.
In case you can't quite work out which way I voted, it was remain.

ah ......the old leave voters are thick,ignorant,little Englander racist xenophobes plan of attack.
the other moaners will be licking their lips

of course should be debated and voted by Parliament. And if we have to follow the lead of the sensible Irish until we get the right result then so be it.

MP`s will vote to trigger article 50
but if they dont perhaps they should keep on voting until we get the right result

 

[GT49er]

And what evidence do you have that the judges are corrupt. Maybe you would like to appear in Court in front of these three esteemed judges to present your evidence.

You mean allow judges to decide whether they themselves are corrupt or not.




Hmmm......interesting take on jurisprudence.

 

[lawros left foot]

View attachment 79145

I can live with the first two, but the third one, being openly gay,


IT'S AN OUTRAGE!!!!!!

 

[GoldWithFalmer]

Sorry, I thought it was just the High Court Judges, that you were accusing of corruption, I didn't slide it was the entire establishment.

And, didn't Gove say that we don't need experts?

He was right,just the will of the majority of the people,MP's voted to give us the vote (twice) -i assume that vote was given with the proviso that "either" answer would be accepted..

 

[Hastings gull]

And not a single leaver had a coherent plan for Brexit, which is why we're in the brown and smelly stuff now.
I think this is more to do with the fact, nobody in power thought we'd be mad enough to vote leave.

I am sure that you are right in that no one in the Westminster Bubble thought that - you just added the "mad" bit for good measure, of course. As to whether no one had any idea, as you arrogantly claim, you could not possibly be in a position to make such a sweeping statement. What I do strongly suspect, is that if the bubble tries to overturn the result, a rather worrying few months awaits us, as millions question the value of democracy. It is no good talking about the referendum just being "advisory" all of a sudden - there will be fury and to whom will the folk turn?

 

[JCL666]

17 million people are wrong but a Guyanan hedge fund lady interested in profits and 3 corrupt eu paid judges are correct ?

They're corrupt?

They just provided an interpretation of the law. I'm sure it's been said quite a few times, but in case you missed it.... We live in a parliamentary democracy, the referendum wasn't binding. No referendum is or has been. Even the AV vote was a pre-legislative one, so if the answer had been yes, it would have still required legislation.

That isn't the judges fault, the blame lies on the people who drafted the thing and the associated message that went out to the public.

 

[pastafarian]

Sorry, I thought it was just the High Court Judges, that you were accusing of corruption, I didn't realise it was the entire political establishment.

And, didn't Gove say that we don't need experts?

who cares about experts ....im starting to think we dont need MP`s
anyone know any anarchists?

 

[yxee]

They're corrupt?

They just provided an interpretation of the law. I'm sure it's been said quite a few times, but in case you missed it.... We live in a parliamentary democracy, the referendum wasn't binding. No referendum is or has been. Even the AV vote was a pre-legislative one, so if the answer had been yes, it would have still required legislation.

That isn't the judges fault, the blame lies on the people who drafted the thing and the associated message that went out to the public.

Of course the referendum isn't binding. That wasn't what this judgement was though. This judgement effectively said that a referendum isn't enough for the government to trigger Article 50.

 

[JCL666]

Of course the referendum isn't binding. That wasn't what this judgement was though. This judgement effectively said that a referendum isn't enough for the government to trigger Article 50.

Which is correct according to the law and the political process we have.

 

[beorhthelm]

View attachment 79145

rather than character assassination, do you think we could have some input on why their judgment is wrong, what power the PM has to revoke legislation without parliament?

the whining from the leavers on this is as bad as the remainers for the past few months. worse, because its been determined our parliament - the institution we want to protect from EU power - will have to decide what happens next. i dont know why we've bothered.

 

[lawros left foot]

I am sure that you are right in that no one in the Westminster Bubble thought that - you just added the "mad" bit for good measure, of course. As to whether no one had any idea, as you arrogantly claim, you could not possibly be in a position to make such a sweeping statement. What I do strongly suspect, is that if the bubble tries to overturn the result, a rather worrying few months awaits us, as millions question the value of democracy. It is no good talking about the referendum just being "advisory" all of a sudden - there will be fury and to whom will the folk turn?

In my opinion it was, and still is mad.
As for 'The Plan' I await its unveiling with bated breath, but it would have been nice to know it , before we voted.

 

[Dick Head]

I can live with the first two, but the third one, being openly gay,


IT'S AN OUTRAGE!!!!!!

I know, it was on the front page of the Daily Mail website for a few minutes after the decision was announced this morning. They changed it pretty sharpish, but not before lots of people managed to get a scrreenshot of it.

 

[lawros left foot]

I know, it was on the front page of the Daily Mail website for a few minutes after the decision was announced this morning. They changed it pretty sharpish, but not before lots of people managed to get a scrreenshot of it.

Surely not the Daily Mail? They really don't do self awareness, do they?

 

[Dick Head]

Surely not the Daily Mail? They really don't do self awareness, do they?

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2016/11/0...-because-an-openly-gay-judge-ruled-on-brexit/

 

[GT49er]

They're corrupt?

They just provided an interpretation of the law. I'm sure it's been said quite a few times, but in case you missed it.... We live in a parliamentary democracy, the referendum wasn't binding. No referendum is or has been. Even the AV vote was a pre-legislative one, so if the answer had been yes, it would have still required legislation.

That isn't the judges fault, the blame lies on the people who drafted the thing and the associated message that went out to the public.

Corrupt? No, probably not, just proving (as has been done so many times) that the law is an ass, and cannot apply common sense.

"M'lords, you have before you a very rich woman who doesn't like the result of the referendum who feels she personally may suffer some financial discomfort as a result. She has a whole team of top barristers, many of whom will be personally known to you. She would like you to put a spanner in the works of the democratic referendum and rule that 17.4 million votes don't count (after all, m'lud, they're not the votes of (rich) people like us.)"

Common sense answer? "P*** off!"

Judges answer? "OK, let's have a look then, see if we can find a loophole, and uphold the self-importance of the judiciary."

 

[daveinprague]

Defenders of British law upset by British law

 

[Guy Fawkes]

rather than character assassination, do you think we could have some input on why their judgment is wrong, what power the PM has to revoke legislation without parliament?

the whining from the leavers on this is as bad as the remainers for the past few months. worse, because its been determined our parliament - the institution we want to protect from EU power - will have to decide what happens next. i dont know why we've bothered.

This is a bit like if the Scottish independence vote had ended in an out majority and then legal challenges and protests, etc were brought and the Courts ruled in favour of stopping it from happening until the MPs voted on the subject where they could go against the result and make them stay as a part of the UK. Where is the justice in that? where is the democracy if the majority doesn't win just because the minority lost and doesn't like the outcome because they feel that the outcome doesn't suit them or their own selfish needs?

I think it makes a mockery of having a public vote if the Courts can invalidate its outcome and leave the decision to Parliament where it can then be overturned if they so wish and therefore going by their own personal preference rather than with the majority result - as we saw, the result showed that it wasn't a one party issue and that all parties were divided on the subject so how do you have a General Election on this if our Politics is based on Left / Right politics ?

What's the point of democracy if the democratically decided outcome is over-ruled and can be overturned by the minority (or at least stopping / delaying progress for as long as they can) That's just an illusion of democracy to fool the masses (Just like the way the EU works) and some people seemingly are happy for a lack of a democratic process to continue, it's more like a dictatorship instead

Why have elections and public votes then? It clearly doesn't matter to some people what the outcome is, they will still fight against the result and do everything in their power to overrule the wishes of the people of this country (as shown by the outcome of the legal action) until they get their way

 

[GT49er]

This is a bit like if the Scottish independence vote had ended in an out majority and then legal challenges and protests, etc were brought and the Courts ruled in favour of stopping it from happening until the MPs voted on the subject where they could go against the result and make them stay as a part of the UK. Where is the justice in that? where is the democracy if the majority doesn't win just because the minority lost and doesn't like the outcome because they feel that the outcome doesn't suit them or their own selfish needs?

I think it makes a mockery of having a public vote if the Courts can invalidate its outcome and leave the decision to Parliament where it can then be overturned if they so wish and therefore going by their own personal preference rather than with the majority result - as we saw, the result showed that it wasn't a one party issue and that all parties were divided on the subject so how do you have a General Election on this if our Politics is based on Left / Right politics ?

What's the point of democracy if the democratically decided outcome is over-ruled and can be overturned by the minority (or at least stopping / delaying progress for as long as they can) That's just an illusion of democracy to fool the masses (Just like the way the EU works) and some people seemingly are happy for a lack of a democratic process to continue, it's more like a dictatorship instead

Why have elections and public votes then? It clearly doesn't matter to some people what the outcome is, they will still fight against the result and do everything in their power to overrule the wishes of the people of this country (as shown by the outcome of the vote) until they get their way

It's the EU way. Keep having referendums until you finally get the 'right' result.