Please tell me you realise that's a piss take?
I would not lay any money on it .
Please tell me you realise that's a piss take?
Well I was going to suggest a truce,
There is if you pretend to be an impartial immigration watchdog, and then cherry pick only the evidence that shows negative impacts of immigration while completely ignoring any research that shows any neutral or even positive effects of it.
why?
Remoaners (not the same as remainers) who want the vote overturned are weasels.There can be no truce with them until we have left the EU.
They have a clear agenda to reverse the vote, a truce will allow their lies and backsliding to putrefy the democratic process.
They can claim all they like that all they want to do is have more discussion to ensure we have the best deal, what they really mean is how can we overturn the vote and stay in the EU.
Extract taken from a long article in their own dodgy newspaper last week.
http://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top...nd_why_the_eu_is_worth_fighting_for_1_4844381
How to fight Brexit
There are three connected strands in the opposition to Brexit. One is to get our members of Parliament in both Houses to reject the advice of the advisory referendum. There are majorities in both Houses of Parliament for Remain. We must ask why MPs in the Commons have not yet demanded a free vote in which they exercise their own individual judgments on whether the UK is better in or out of the EU. One reason for the unseemly haste with which Brexiteers are trying to hustle the UK past the Article 50 trigger is that they wish to avoid such a vote at any cost. My own view is that MPs must be persuaded – lobbied, encouraged, supported, pressed – to demand a non-Party-whipped vote, and to vote according to their pre-June 23 publicly stated judgment on the question of EU membership. Such a vote would preserve our membership of the EU and safeguard the UK’s future.
The second is the various legal challenges on whether there has to be such a vote, and whether a Brexit trigger is revocable or not. This latter is the strategy favoured by my friend Jolyon Maugham QC, and he is taking crowd-funded legal action to explore the matter. His point is that if the article is triggered and, after a period of years some form of Brexit deal is reached but is held to be unsatisfactory in comparison to continued EU membership, Article 50 can be untriggered and the UK could reemain in the EU.
The third route is for there to be a future vote, either in Parliament or in a referendum – this latter naturally connected to the untriggering strategy – on the acceptability of any Brexit deal, rejection of the deal entailing continued EU membership.
Please tell me you realise that's a piss take?
why?
Remoaners (not the same as remainers) who want the vote overturned are weasels.There can be no truce with them until we have left the EU.
They have a clear agenda to reverse the vote, a truce will allow their lies and backsliding to putrefy the democratic process.
They can claim all they like that all they want to do is have more discussion to ensure we have the best deal, what they really mean is how can we overturn the vote and stay in the EU.
Extract taken from a long article in their own dodgy newspaper last week.
http://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top...nd_why_the_eu_is_worth_fighting_for_1_4844381
How to fight Brexit
There are three connected strands in the opposition to Brexit. One is to get our members of Parliament in both Houses to reject the advice of the advisory referendum. There are majorities in both Houses of Parliament for Remain. We must ask why MPs in the Commons have not yet demanded a free vote in which they exercise their own individual judgments on whether the UK is better in or out of the EU. One reason for the unseemly haste with which Brexiteers are trying to hustle the UK past the Article 50 trigger is that they wish to avoid such a vote at any cost. My own view is that MPs must be persuaded – lobbied, encouraged, supported, pressed – to demand a non-Party-whipped vote, and to vote according to their pre-June 23 publicly stated judgment on the question of EU membership. Such a vote would preserve our membership of the EU and safeguard the UK’s future.
The second is the various legal challenges on whether there has to be such a vote, and whether a Brexit trigger is revocable or not. This latter is the strategy favoured by my friend Jolyon Maugham QC, and he is taking crowd-funded legal action to explore the matter. His point is that if the article is triggered and, after a period of years some form of Brexit deal is reached but is held to be unsatisfactory in comparison to continued EU membership, Article 50 can be untriggered and the UK could reemain in the EU.
The third route is for there to be a future vote, either in Parliament or in a referendum – this latter naturally connected to the untriggering strategy – on the acceptability of any Brexit deal, rejection of the deal entailing continued EU membership.
I see you have decided to fully support the wishes of Mrs May already and are right behind her desire that 'the victors have the responsibility to act magnanimously'
It must be a proud day in your household.
Difficult is an understatement, and belies your lack of understanding of the financial services industry and the associated markets.
One of the critical reasons that the UK is a global financial hub is the legal system, which is based on common law. The UK legal system is trusted and is aligned with the US common law. Common law is the underlying law in all the major global financial markets and sets the legal framework for the governance of companies. This legal system is trusted and desired, its why many global companies list on the stock markets, in those countries, principally NY, HK and LON.
The legal system in Europe is not, it does not come close..........notwithstanding the technical architecture they could not produce a credible legal system. You are on the losing side on this one (again).
Give up.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law
This is an interesting article.
RESISTING BREXIT IS DEMOCRATIC
http://www.juliewardmep.eu/resisting_brexit_is_democratic
I've been licking my wounds after yesterday's encounter with the clamp.
The words speak for themselves, I would have thought that the intent is clear for all to see. I merely posted it to bring a degree of amusement to the thread this afternoon
The only assault on democracy is from hard Brexiters who want to shut down any opinion outside of their own. Anyone wanting the result overturned is asking for that to happen in a democratic way. You fear not getting the result you want second time around, or fear allowing the Parliament, whose sovereignty you so wish to protect, to apply their sovereignty and have a say that might go against your view, and you fear it because you feel that democracy would not give you what you want, and you don't want to take that risk.
I really don't see how anyone can seriously expect us to have
1. Control of our borders (which everyone must agree was a major point of the Brexit case)
and
2. Remain (sorry - my bad) in the customs union which insists of Free Movement.
Something has to give. Either we leave the EU, accept Free Movement or the EU bands its rules.
The only assault on democracy is from hard Brexiters who want to shut down any opinion outside of their own. Anyone wanting the result overturned is asking for that to happen in a democratic way. You fear not getting the result you want second time around, or fear allowing the Parliament, whose sovereignty you so wish to protect, to apply their sovereignty and have a say that might go against your view, and you fear it because you feel that democracy would not give you what you want, and you don't want to take that risk.
The only assault on democracy is from hard Brexiters who want to shut down any opinion outside of their own. Anyone wanting the result overturned is asking for that to happen in a democratic way. You fear not getting the result you want second time around, or fear allowing the Parliament, whose sovereignty you so wish to protect, to apply their sovereignty and have a say that might go against your view, and you fear it because you feel that democracy would not give you what you want, and you don't want to take that risk.
, I am now looking foward to Friday night and have put the Preston defeat to bed.
Remainers had it so good for so long, they had the establishment on their side, but It didn't work. What they did instead was manage to piss people off. My wife was one of many undecided voters until Obama opened his mouth and told us we are going to back of the queue. You really cant treat people like fing idiots in the way Remain did. The vote was Leave, and it should be respected.
Remainers had it so good for so long, they had the establishment on their side, but It didn't work. What they did instead was manage to piss people off. My wife was one of many undecided voters until Obama opened his mouth and told us we are going to back of the queue. You really cant treat people like fing idiots in the way Remain did. The vote was Leave, and it should be respected.