Forum menu
. The thread is surreal now and for amusement/venting purposes only.
It's like therapy for me, commenting with other people all gaping in wonder at our nation's spiral into ****wittery
We passed ****wittery so long ago you couldn't poke it with a 100% british made union jack bedecked immigrant prod.
We need new words for where we are now..........
Still no Jamba?
We're in Jambageddon.
I keep agreeing with THM.
Non-EU immigration levels, lack of seriousness
It's worrying
I just had a delightful threat of violence messaged to me on Facebook from a brexiter who took exemption to a comment about referendum being legally binding, he seemed quite certain of my sexuality and everything, this country really is turning out just lovely
Can't imagine what kind of threats Gina Miller has received
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37869797
All the brexiters on my facebook who I haven't defriended or they defriended me when this whole debacle kicked off have become mysteriously apolitical all of a sudden.
Can't imagine what kind of threats Gina Miller has received
I have just read that and am mortified. On one hand the "winning" brexshitters expect that the losers behave with decorum, yet when their feathers are slighly ruffled out comes the bile and hate.
These are the people who are being defended on here, it's oft claimed that they are not racist bigots. Hell! They do bloody good impressions then.
Kimbers, the country has always been as it now appears. There was just enough control in the mainstream media for people to think twice. Now that the media have made it clear that xenophobia and racism are perfectly acceptable why bother with the veneer?
Why bother with i am not racist but, you can just state i hate ****s, etc.
Wonder what Geneva is like to live in?
Well I'm increasingly coming to the conclusion that 50% of the world's population are quite happy to rub along with everyone else whilst 50% are xenophobic isolationists. So let's have one huge pan-national collective for people who like each other and lots of individual little enclaves with stout walls around them (to keep everyone else out of course) for the isolationists. The difficulty is apportioning the land. Who gets the nice bits?
Me, me
On one hand the "winning" brexshitters expect that the losers behave with decorum, yet when their feathers are slighly ruffled out comes the bile and hate.
These are the people who are being defended on here, it's oft claimed that they are not racist bigots. Hell! They do bloody good impressions then.
I'd like to point out that not all Brexiters act as one. The ones who were asking for decorum are probably not the same ones sending death threads.
You may not be pre-judging people by their race, but you are pre-judging people based on their referendum vote.
[i]Well I'm increasingly coming to the conclusion that 50% of the world's population are quite happy to rub along with everyone else whilst 50% are xenophobic isolationists.[/I]
It's 52% 🙂
😀
The ones who were asking for decorum are probably not the same ones sending death threads.
I am fully aware that those that are issuing death threats wouldn't use, or understand, the word decorum either.
Wonder what Geneva is like to live in?
A two-class society, the Swiss and les transfrontaliers.
A two-class society, the Swiss and les transfrontaliers.
but are 52% xenophobic!
Well I'm increasingly coming to the conclusion that 50% of the world's population are quite happy to rub along with everyone else whilst 50% are xenophobic isolationists.
Me too. What with the fact that UKIP can't even agree on a leader, Brexshiters can't agree on how hard they want to Brexshit and the government is constantly briefing against itself on the pattern of deckchairs on the 'Titanic' success, the Leavers all appear have checked into the argument room and are incapable of agreeing where the door is.
It's a hell of a lot easier to destroy things than build them. It's just not particularly smart.
b r - MemberIt's 52% 🙂
More like 26%, of the population. 😉
Brexshiters can't agree on how hard they want to Brexshit
Because there's at least two groups of Brexiters. One that want to kick out the brown people, and one that thinks the EU is an intransigent organisation that doesn't serve Britain's interests economically.
More like 26%, of the population.
Oh good, their enclave just got smaller.
The UK news papers are utterly shocking with the front page headlines right now, they are basically inciting terrorism, and encoraging a military coup.
It really is absurd, but not a supprise as the people who own them are essentially criminals with known political agendas.
Imagine the carnage if the shoe was on the other foot, anyone with a sun tan or a foreign sounding surname should probably watch out.
Hopefully Nigel Farage would be first on the hit list. FOREIGN SURNAME! Nail him to a cross and burn him alive!
Carl Gardners opinion for the law geeks:
https://www.headoflegal.com/2016/11/04/why-the-high-court-got-the-law-wrong-about-brexit
The comments on that are different from most comments threads
What percentage of Brexiters are sending death and take threats?
kimbers - Member
What percentage of Brexiters are sending death and take threats?
Probably none coz nobody knows who sent those email.
It could simply be remainders pretending to be Brexit voters trying to fuel the fire.
It could simply be remainders pretending to be Brexit voters trying to fuel the fire.
yes of course it is 🙄
Unless there is definite proof that those threats come from people who voted for Brexit then she can claim whatever she wishes.kimbers - Member
It could simply be remainders pretending to be Brexit voters trying to fuel the fire.
yes of course it is
but are 52% xenophobic!
Only 50.3% voted to stop free movement, so no, not quite. Unless you think the 57.5% who voted to ban minarets might be a bit xenophobic, then yes.
Unless there is definite proof that those threats come from people who voted for Brexit then she can claim whatever she wishes.
[img] 
[/img]
Does it matter who voted for Brexit? They come from all parts of society from the normal to the very weird. A diverse UK population like you and me.
The bottom line is that referendum has been won by Brexit.
The process is now being delayed by some pen pushers who are trying to hijack and to over turn the will of the people.
kimbers - Member
Yes, remainders loss in the referendum. Who is that bloke in the gif? Looks familiar ...
If you think the breexiter are stupid though consider the 27.8% percent that weren't smart enough to even vote...
Not pen pushers.
UK laws by UK judges telling UK government that UK parliament is sovereign.
What is wrong with that?
It could simply be remainders pretending to be Brexit voters trying to fuel the fire.
I mean, you can't actually believe this yourself, can you?
The process is now being delayed by some pen pushers who are trying to hijack and to over turn the will of [b]some of[/b] the people.
You almost had me fooled into thinking that a few people was the same as a majority.
But you're right, let's get this thing started and I'm sure that as soon as the govt works out what it is that they're supposed to be doing they'll do it.
What an absurd clusterf we have going on here and you still seem to think it's good. 🙄
The judges are not the govt and they do not run the country. They might be technically capable but they cannot overturn a referendum and the will of the majority. That should be common sense.cchris2lou - Member
Not pen pushers.
UK laws by UK judges telling UK government that UK parliament is sovereign.
What is wrong with that?
They are not acting as though they run the country. They are reminding the PM who does.
"Carl Gardners opinion for the law geeks:
https://www.headoflegal.com/2016/11/04/why-the-high-court-got-the-law-wrong-about-brexi t"
Thanks, I don't claim to fully understand it all but reading it, plus some of the comments, was really interesting.
The judges are not the govt and they do not run the country. They might be technically capable but they cannot overturn a referendum and the will of the majority. That should be common sense.
Thank god we've got judges.
No one is above the law.
Not even the government
Yes. Everyone can email etc everyone on interweb and claim to be someone that is one thing we can do with technology nowadays. So unless you are have a definite proof what you are doing is merely accusing others unfairly. Proof it and I shall agree with you.captainsasquatch - Member
I mean, you can't actually believe this yourself, can you?It could simply be remainders pretending to be Brexit voters trying to fuel the fire.
You almost had me fooled into thinking that a few people was the same as a majority.
But you're right, let's get this thing started and I'm sure that as soon as the govt works out what it is that they're supposed to be doing they'll do it.
What an absurd clusterf we have going on here and you still seem to think it's good.
You loss the referendum whether it is my one vote or two vote you still loss.
You are now just arguing with desperation.
Govt will do the right thing.
The judges are not the govt and they do not run the country. They might be technically capable but they cannot overturn a referendum and the will of the majority. That should be common sense.
Without putting too fine a point on it, are you really that ****ing stupid and incapable of reading what the judgement was? No part of it even suggested that it is to overturn a referendum result. It is about saying that parliament must decide what happens, as part of representative democracy, not just the PM or cabinet, in what would essentially amount to dictatorship.
Thanks, I don't claim to fully understand it all
Which is why we have judges. Shame the same didn't apply to the referendum. We were in no position to vote on a topic we know very little about and were told next to nothing about.
It's also worth remembering that whether an act of parliament would be needed to trigger Article 50 was being discussed before the referendum, so it should come as no surprise to anyone.
"Not pen pushers.
UK laws by UK judges telling UK government that UK parliament is sovereign.
What is wrong with that?"
That EU treaties are usually agreed by Royal prerogative, so if you can't end a treaty by royal prerogative it follows you can't agree a treaty by royal prerogative - and we've agreed dozens of them since the early 70's.
So if this decision is correct far from leaving the EU it might mean we were never legally in it as it exists today...
All academic but quite interesting.
The MPs do not run the country as well. It is the Govt and that the people have voted to leave. The Govt should bow to the will of the people. Very simple. NOT a bunch of backstabbing MPs.slowoldman - Member
They are not acting as though they run the country. They are reminding the PM who does.
cchris2lou - Member
No one is above the law.
Not even the government
No law is above Democracy and the will of people.
Hence both the Govt and the law must bow to the will of the people in Democracy.
You are now just arguing with desperation.
Unlike your good self on this forum, the vast majority of the posts here would be in favour of remain, yet here you are desperately arguing that your view is correct.
I say that that the lady doth too much protesting.
As for prooving the origin of emails and tweets I think we have discovered the world's first fireless smoke. Grow up.
Are you so incapable of comprehend the outcome of the referendum? The remainders loss the referendum. The law cannot prevent overturn the referendum outcome. The law must bow and so do you. Parliament democracy whatever must bow to the referendum. It is common sense.Shackleton - Member
Without putting too fine a point on it, are you really that **** stupid and incapable of reading what the judgement was? No part of it even suggested that it is to overturn a referendum result. It is about saying that parliament must decide what happens, as part of representative democracy, not just the PM or cabinet, in what would essentially amount to dictatorship.
Leave him everyone
"We were in no position to vote on a topic we know very little about and were told next to nothing about."
I agree, it's mental. With an A Level in economics I'm supposed to come to a sane conclusion about something that economists don't all agree about and that some even think is a political rather than economic decision!
Civil servants with Oxbridge double firsts in PPE are paid top dollar to work this stuff out. How the hell do they expect me to come to a correct conclusion in my spare time.
Yes, you might be the majority in this forum that fuel each others fire but the bottom line is the remainder loss. Argue until you face is blue remainder still loss the referendum.captainsasquatch - Member
You are now just arguing with desperation.
Unlike your good self on this forum, the vast majority of the posts here would be in favour of remain, yet here you are desperately arguing that your view is correct.
Everyone can start a fire. Welcome to the world of interweb and unless you have proof you are just accusing others unfairly.I say that that the lady doth too much protesting.
As for prooving the origin of emails and tweets I think we have discovered the world's first fireless smoke. Grow up.
Are you so incapable of comprehend the outcome of the referendum? The remainders loss the referendum. The law cannot prevent overturn the referendum outcome. [b]The law must bow and so do you.[/b] Parliament democracy whatever must bow to the referendum. It is common sense.
Funniest thing ever. 😆
Closely followed by "It is common sense." 😀 😆
Parliament democracy whatever must bow to the referendum
Well wrong on two counts then.
You are correct OOB. Referenda are fundamentally anti-democratic. They may have a place in internal decisions (how else do you decide on breaking the four nations of the UK) but not in intercountry decisions where we elect a government to look after that sort of thing.
I suspect if Remain had promised to build a thousand puppy sanctuaries a week they would have won.
captainsasquatch - Member
Funniest thing ever.
Closely followed by "It is common sense."
Yes, you/remainders loss the referendum regardless of the percentage you still loss.
Did you not hear David Dimbleby announced the result on the telly? We are out. We have reversed the decision made 43 years ago.
Yes, the court might be pussy footing about but you will need to fall in line soon.
Funniest thing is that remainders do not want to accept the result of the referendum.
No one is really suggesting Parliament is going to stop Brexit, the best Remain can hope for is a delay or some sort of pressure to force the Government into a soft Brexit. Everyone inc Remainers said Brexit meant leaving the single market as per the video I posted weeks ago. As I said my 2 cents is that May would win an A50 vote if one proves necessary and no legislation is needed before bypassing the Lords. Hence her message the Junker that we are on track for an end March A50 at latest.
Yes, you might be the majority in this forum that fuel each others fire but the bottom line is the remainder loss. Argue until you face is blue remainder still loss the referendum.
You really don't read other people's posts do you Chewkw.
If you did, you would see that most posts are not suggesting anything other than the vote (narrowly) was for exit.
The point is the judgement did not say anything about the valididty of the result.
They can overturn the will of the people if they want. They can try. I think they should force that on the people don't you think so? Use their political power to overturn the will of the people and referendum.slowoldman - Member
Parliament democracy whatever must bow to the referendum
Well wrong on two counts then.
I could accept the result if it wasn't for the NHS pledge. A big fat ,blatant lie .
You can't run an election that focuses on 2 subjects and then say that you were only kidding on one of them.
YOU JUST CAN'T ****ING DO THAT.
jimw - Member
You really don't read other people's posts do you Chewkw.If you did, you would see that most posts are not suggesting anything other than the vote (narrowly) was for exit.
The point is the judgement did not say anything about the valididty of the result.
You lot are going in circle by trying to come up with non-existence justification about all the technicality of referendum.
Face it the remainders loss the referendum. The margin is irrelevant. The result has been announced. We are leaving EU.
You lot are making a mockery of a national referendum and cannot face up to the face that the people have voted to leave.
Funniest thing is that remainders do not want to accept the result of the referendum.
In your frothing you have clearly missed the multiple times that I have said get the f on with it. If you know what it is to be getting on with.
You're funny in your own special way, it's almost like a one man trade mission from a foreign country who's just realised that they might have won the same opportunity that they had before, only without the access to Europe.
Let's celebrate your win.
Referenda are fundamentally anti-democratic.
Why not try that argument on the SNP. We should have Swiss style legally binding referendums 2-4 times a year on specific cross party questions. Brexit showed quite clearly the issue was cross party
Chewkw - what you keep shouting is your desired ideology. It has nothing to do with the law in the uk. Numerous people have tried to explain this to you now in various ways but you seem incapable of getting your head around it.
So, for the last time before I killscript you, yesterdays judgment was absolutely not an attempt to overturn whatever passes for the will of the people. It wasn't even about the referendum. It was abut how the result of the referendum should be considered and enacted given that the process of doing so requires overturning an act of parliament. It doesn't matter what you and the other far right crazies think, on this matter you are 100% wrong.
Why not try that argument on the SNP.
And let's get the rest of Europe involved in brexit.
reading comments on facebook about the legal decision, is mightily depressing
sooo many people dont have even a basic idea about the law, economics, parliament.... I mean how do they get through life having so little clue about ....anything
yeah I sound like a snooty remoaner, but really wtf??
zippykona - MemberI could accept the result if it wasn't for the NHS pledge. A big fat ,blatant lie .
You can't run an election that focuses on 2 subjects and then say that you were only kidding on one of them.
YOU JUST CAN'T **** DO THAT.
You can run an election with whatever slogans you want even claiming "pig can fly" it is still legitimate.
People want to vote leave because they are fed up by the constantly annoying political institution that is EU and their bureaucrats.
Which part of the rules of election that say I cannot pledge "pig cannot fly"?
There is nothing wrong with the claim. Just different interpretation.
Jamba - re the SNP read what I wrote. For internal decisions referenda while undesirable may be necessary as there is no clear sovereign authority otherwise, but for whether a sovereign nation wants to be part of a trade club they are just silly. I've pointed this out to my excuse of an MP but he's apparently a bit scared to reply.
As I said, chewkw, it was known before the referendum there may be a challenge on whether there would need to be an Act of Parliament. This judgement says yes, the Supreme Court may overturn that, I don't know.
Also, as pointed out umpteen times this was an advisory referendum. Government does not have to uphold the result though I accept they have said they will and it would be extremely difficult for them to ignore it.
You said "No law is above Democracy" but the reality is that the Government and Parliament are not above the law.
Yes it's likely Article 50 will be triggered but let the correct process take place.
lets for a moment look at Turkey, where the the executive has decided to trample over parliament and seize absolute power.
Now look at the UK, where the judges has reminded the executive that they do not have unfettered power and have to convince parliament that their plans will work.
Checks and balances.
One thing to consider - why is May so determined to stop any debate in the Commons? MY guess it is because she knows the shambolic mess of the tory policy on this cannot stand up to any scrutiny.
You can run an election with whatever slogans you want even claiming "pig can fly" it is still legitimate.
People want to vote leave because they are fed up by the constantly annoying political institution that is EU and their bureaucrats.
Which part of the rules of election that say I cannot pledge "pig cannot fly"?
There is nothing wrong with the claim. Just different interpretation.
You are either a very persistent troll or a deliberately deceitful and mendacious con artist then. When something is a demonstrable lie it is immoral to claim otherwise.
captainsasquatch - Member
In your frothing you have clearly missed the multiple times that I have said get the f on with it. If you know what it is to be getting on with.
You're funny in your own special way, it's almost like a one man trade mission from a foreign country who's just realised that they might have won the same opportunity that they had before, only without the access to Europe.
Let's celebrate your win.
I am replying multiple times because most remainders have difficulty in accepting that they have loss the referendum. They keep going in circle trying to come up all sort of excuses to prevent the will of the people. Who cares about mission from foreign country coz it is non-issue. You loss the referendum that is much more important in the UK context. Not some foreign mission etc ...
We should have Swiss style legally binding referendums 2-4 times a year on specific cross party questions.
yeah 2-4 brexishambles a year, as if this farce hadnt stirred up enough division and hatred in the country
(obvs it should be mandatory that all slogans have to be written on the side of a bus 😉 )
Shackleton - Member
You are either a very persistent troll or a deliberately deceitful and mendacious con artist then. When something is a demonstrable lie it is immoral to claim otherwise.
The rules in election do not specific what slogan(s) a party can use so unless you can show me that certain slogan(s) cannot be used in election campaign then most slogans are legitimate. As I said before different parties might simply interpret the information differently.
No need to reply after this coz I am over and out as you don't understand this basic.
I am replying multiple times because most remainders have difficulty in accepting that they have loss the referendum. They keep going in circle trying to come up all sort of excuses to prevent the will of the people. Who cares about mission from foreign country coz it is non-issue. You loss the referendum that is much more important in the UK context. Not some foreign mission etc ...
Prove that I have not accepted the loss of the referendum, or shut up.
When something is a demonstrable lie it is immoral to claim otherwise.
Oh he'll probably just claim it's his culture.
I am replying multiple times because most remainders have difficulty in accepting that they have loss the referendum. They keep going in circle trying to come up all sort of excuses to prevent the will of the people
Where is anyone trying to prevent the will of the people?
You are correct OOB. Referenda are fundamentally anti-democratic. They may have a place in internal decisions (how else do you decide on breaking the four nations of the UK) but not in intercountry decisions where we elect a government to look after that sort of thing.
No, as Tony Benn pointed out regards EU referenda, those elected to parliament are lent powers, by the people, to use on their behalf, and they have no right to hand those powers away to somebody else (the EU). His contention was that only the people could do that.
Edit:
For all I'd disagree with Tony Benn on, he was spot on here, and sums up many of the reasons why I voted to leave the EU very well.
So here are the judges who will decide on the appeal
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37874388 ]Supreme Court Judges[/url]
The rules in election does not specific what slogan a party can use so unless you can show me that certain slogan cannot be used in election campaign then it is all legitimate. As I said before different parties might simple interpret the information differently.
Over and out.
Now we are getting somewhere. You can't tell the difference between morally right and legal. Just because there isn't a specific law forbidding something doesn't mean that it is perfectly acceptable to do something.