Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Politics] Brexit

If there was a second Brexit referendum how would you vote?


  • Total voters
    1,084












Neville's Breakfast

Well-known member
May 1, 2016
13,423
Oxton, Birkenhead
He didn't say Brexit was a good idea. Far from it.
The bit Soulman missed out of the express' take on the interview was:

Speaking about Brexit, he added: “It was, everyone seems to agree, the moment when the forgotten spoke, finding their voices to reject the advice and guidance of experts and the elite everywhere."

He's only repeating it was an anti-establishment vote, **** all to do with the EU.

Whether he thinks Brexit is a good idea or a bad idea is about as (or equally) important to whether you or
I think it is a good idea. Mr Hawking is mainly renowned for his scientific knowledge which does not make his view any more or less worthwhile. I think the point of the quote is that those in the Referendum campaign who thought his views to be particularly important shouldn't dismiss them now he is talking about the changed post Referendum world.
 




Notters

Well-known member
Oct 20, 2003
24,869
Guiseley
Would not have had you down as travelling there,i bet it was...thing is in all seriousness certain parts of the country and the north are cut off from the overall picture of the UK and as a result integration is a far slower process.

One of my best mates is from Pontefract. I remember his mate saying how it must be great fro us to live so close to Cornwall!
 


GT49er

Well-known member
Feb 1, 2009
46,840
Gloucester
He didn't say Brexit was a good idea. Far from it.
The bit Soulman missed out of the express' take on the interview was:

Speaking about Brexit, he added: “It was, everyone seems to agree, the moment when the forgotten spoke, finding their voices to reject the advice and guidance of experts and the elite everywhere."

Never said he did (say Brexit was a good idea). And I read the interview, so please don't be so patronising.

What he said that you would obviously like to exclude was that politicians trying to overturn or ignore the result of the referendum would be making a terrible mistake:

He wrote: “Should we, in turn, reject these votes as outpourings of crude populism that fail to take account of the facts, and attempt to circumvent or circumscribe the choices that they represent? I would argue that this would be a terrible mistake.

As I said, remarkable words from a remarkable man. Respect.
 


















Soulman

New member
Oct 22, 2012
10,966
Sompting
Nottes implied it by trying to draw out some kind of irony in the post:

"Yeah, it's awful when you go to A&E and it's full... of foreign doctors and nurses wanting to save you're life."

I think that even with controlled immigration and hopefully skills we need, there will still be "foreign doctors and nurses wanting to save you're life", as these will be amongst the people coming in, and amongst the people who want to live and work here.
 






GoldWithFalmer

Seaweed! Seaweed!
Apr 24, 2011
12,687
SouthCoast
Because it's in Yorkshire which is a horrible place.

It has it's places we will admit,but i have a few family up in Leeds/Halifax and surrounding area on my dads side.....

I swear allegiance to Sussex tho historically who knows as i have not done a family tree trace yet.
 


nicko31

Well-known member
Jan 7, 2010
17,649
Gods country fortnightly
Quite unbelievable the bloke on the far right on the QT panel criticises the elite given his upbringing and the fact his company regularly buys multi million pound property portfolios. About as far from working class as possible.

Indeed another faux friend of the working class, a bit like Farage. Made his money and now its all about an ego trip based on somew nationalist idealogy, the likes of Wakefield will be stitched up by Brexit.

Giving London one in the eye will make the likes of Wakefield feel better for a moment, until they realise you don't get better off by making the whole nation poorer
 
Last edited:


Green Cross Code Man

Wunt be druv
Mar 30, 2006
19,741
Eastbourne
Indeed another faux friend of the working class, a bit like Farage. Made his money and now its all about an ego trip, the likes of Wakefield have been stitched up by Brexit
So Wakefield was a great success story was it when we were part of the 'project'?
 




The Rivet

Well-known member
Aug 9, 2011
4,512
In relation to this weeks supreme court hearing into article 50 (potentially having to be debated by parliament) I am posting this. Very interesting actually considering the original high courts ruling was so reliant on precedent/s set in the English civil war era. If this is right what is to stop Theresa May?

'Prior to Prime Minister Ted Heath signing the Treaty of Rome back in 1973, an act which led us into the then European Economic Community, Mr Heath wrote to the highest legal authority in the land, the then Lord Chancellor Lord Kilmuir, asking him about the legal ramifications of signing up to such a treaty.

Although we do not have a copy of Mr. Heath’s letter we do have a copy of Lord Kilmuir’s reply (which can be found on the internet by entering ‘Lord Kilmuir’s letter to Ted Heath’). In his reply Lord Kilmuir makes it very clear that ceding sovereignty to a foreign power, in any way shape or form and to any degree, would be an act of sedition and treason under the 1351 Treason Act and a Praemunire, under the 1392 Act of Praemunire, Treason under the 1559 Act of Supremacy and Treason under the 1688/9 Declaration and Bill of Rights. Despite this clear and unequivocal legal ruling, Ted Heath chose to ignore this warning and, Quisling like, signed the Treaty of Rome. As the signing of the Treaty of Rome constituted an act of Treason then this renders Ted Heath’s signature, to that Treaty, null and void. The Treaty itself is meaningless to the UK.

As one Parliament is not bound by acts made or passed by its predecessor then each and every government since the time of Ted Heath has likewise committed, or perhaps perpetuated the act treason enacted by Ted Heath, including the present incumbent. No contract is enforceable if it is found to be unlawful. Likewise, no treaty is enforceable if it too is found to be unlawful, as the signing of all EU treaties constituted the act of treason committed by the signatory at the time of signing. Every and all EU treaty’s are unlawful and therefore unenforceable. That being so, then the answer to the question "Can We Legally Leave the European Union?" - is ‘No’, we cannot legally leave the EU as we are not, and have never been, a member of it legally, moreover, as we are not a member of the EU, we do not need to invoke Article 50. All we need do is walk away and leave the rest of the EU to extricate itself from the self-inflicted bird’s nest of a mess it has got itself into, if willingly handing over sovereignty to a foreign power is an act of treason where then does that leave all the folk who voted Remain?'

Not my research just posting it.
 


Green Cross Code Man

Wunt be druv
Mar 30, 2006
19,741
Eastbourne
In relation to this weeks supreme court hearing into article 50 (potentially having to be debated by parliament) I am posting this. Very interesting actually considering the original high courts ruling was so reliant on precedent/s set in the English civil war era. If this is right what is to stop Theresa May?

'Prior to Prime Minister Ted Heath signing the Treaty of Rome back in 1973, an act which led us into the then European Economic Community, Mr Heath wrote to the highest legal authority in the land, the then Lord Chancellor Lord Kilmuir, asking him about the legal ramifications of signing up to such a treaty.

Although we do not have a copy of Mr. Heath’s letter we do have a copy of Lord Kilmuir’s reply (which can be found on the internet by entering ‘Lord Kilmuir’s letter to Ted Heath’). In his reply Lord Kilmuir makes it very clear that ceding sovereignty to a foreign power, in any way shape or form and to any degree, would be an act of sedition and treason under the 1351 Treason Act and a Praemunire, under the 1392 Act of Praemunire, Treason under the 1559 Act of Supremacy and Treason under the 1688/9 Declaration and Bill of Rights. Despite this clear and unequivocal legal ruling, Ted Heath chose to ignore this warning and, Quisling like, signed the Treaty of Rome. As the signing of the Treaty of Rome constituted an act of Treason then this renders Ted Heath’s signature, to that Treaty, null and void. The Treaty itself is meaningless to the UK.

As one Parliament is not bound by acts made or passed by its predecessor then each and every government since the time of Ted Heath has likewise committed, or perhaps perpetuated the act treason enacted by Ted Heath, including the present incumbent. No contract is enforceable if it is found to be unlawful. Likewise, no treaty is enforceable if it too is found to be unlawful, as the signing of all EU treaties constituted the act of treason committed by the signatory at the time of signing. Every and all EU treaty’s are unlawful and therefore unenforceable. That being so, then the answer to the question "Can We Legally Leave the European Union?" - is ‘No’, we cannot legally leave the EU as we are not, and have never been, a member of it legally, moreover, as we are not a member of the EU, we do not need to invoke Article 50. All we need do is walk away and leave the rest of the EU to extricate itself from the self-inflicted bird’s nest of a mess it has got itself into, if willingly handing over sovereignty to a foreign power is an act of treason where then does that leave all the folk who voted Remain?'

Not my research just posting it.
Where is that cited from?
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here