[Politics] Brexit

[pastafarian]

I don’t think that about you at all.

Once in a lifetime? I’ve already voted in two. The rest is waffle. You know very well why I will never respect the result, as I have quoted the High Court verdict from February 2019, several times

I don’t think that about you at all.

eh?

Once in a lifetime? I’ve already voted in two. The rest is waffle.

Only ever had one referendum on membership of the EU, the other was on the EC Common Market.

You know very well why I will never respect the result, as I have quoted the High Court verdict from February 2019, several times

That would be the Court that threw out the appeal case which the remainers lost


Notice you made no mention at all of what i was replying to you about......namely the Aus trade deal negotiations, which havnt begun yet.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

eh?



Only ever had one referendum on membership of the EU, the other was on the EC Common Market.



That would be the Court that threw out the appeal case which the remainers lost


Notice you made no mention at all of what i was replying to you about......namely the Aus trade deal negotiations, which havnt begun yet.

More waffle.
It wasn’t the appeal case, and wasn’t thrown out.

 

[pastafarian]

More waffle.
It wasn’t the appeal case, and wasn’t thrown out.

So you are not referring to the case of Wilson and others v The PM where James Eadie QC was involved that was thrown out and further refused permission to appeal on all grounds in Feb 2019?

Ps. its true not waffle that the first referendum was on the EC common market and the one we had recently was on membership of the EU......you can look it up.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

So you are not referring to the case of Wilson and others v The PM where James Eadie QC was involved that was thrown out and further refused permission to appeal on all grounds in Feb 2019?

Ps. its true not waffle that the first referendum was on the EC common market and the one we had recently was on membership of the EU......you can look it up.

You know neither of those are true. As the referendum was advisory, there was nothing the court could do, whereas had it been mandatory it would have been void. It wasn’t thrown out, but proved to be corrupt,

It was the Common Market, but Ted Heath was always up front about closer integration with preparation beginning even prior to 71 with decimalisation of our currency.

You waffle well just tweaking the truth slightly to appear genuine but it is still waffle. Cummings would be proud.
Have you applied to work for him yet?

 

[JC Footy Genius]

**** me! Is this thread still going? I’m assuming that after 31 Jan we can archive it and certain posters not interested in the Albion can leave NSC and go and find something else to do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Although most moderate, reasonable, democratic remainers came to terms with the 2016 referendum result a long time ago there has always been an extremist rump who can't help themselves. I genuinely feel quite sorry for them ..

 

[pastafarian]

You know neither of those are true. As the referendum was advisory, there was nothing the court could do, whereas had it been mandatory it would have been void. It wasn’t thrown out, but proved to be corrupt,

It was the Common Market, but Ted Heath was always up front about closer integration with preparation beginning even prior to 71 with decimalisation of our currency.

You waffle well just tweaking the truth slightly to appear genuine but it is still waffle. Cummings would be proud.
Have you applied to work for him yet?

One judge refused permission for judicial review with that case and when that was appealed another judge refused permission to appeal and that appeal was thrown out as well…….on all grounds.
It was not proven to be corrupt as the judge at appeal pointed out in summing up why the case was thrown out.

“I agree with Sir James Eadie (and Ouseley J) that a minimum requirement for the exercise of any common law power in this new context of non-binding referendums would be that any breach of rules is material. It would be inconceivable for the common law to adopt a principle that requires or even enables a court of law to interfere with the democratic process where any breach of the voting rules is proved but not such as to affect the result; and, in my view, as Ouseley J properly said, in this case, there is no evidence that gives rise to any soundly based ground for believing the outcome of the referendum result would have been different if the breaches of the rules had not occurred”

It was so worthwhile, he repeated it

“In any event, even if the breaches are taken at their highest – i.e. as found by the Electoral Commission – there is no evidential basis for the proposition that they are material in the sense that, had they not occurred, the result of the EU referendum would probably have been different”

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2019/304.html


I agree with you, it was indeed a referendum on the common market and not the EU.
We have only ever had one referendum on EU membership.

 

[Lever]

Although most moderate, reasonable, democratic remainers came to terms with the 2016 referendum result a long time ago there has always been an extremist rump who can't help themselves. I genuinely feel quite sorry for them ..

...you mean like the extremist rump of those Leave enthusiasts who can't stop themselves from posting silly, gloating, provocative comments and images?

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Your second point has been addressed already but I'd just add that no one is saying there will be no examples of business expansion - but to claim that one example refutes an overall picture is like denying that Crawley Town's attendances are going down on the basis that you know a bloke who's just started going.

Your first point shows no interest in the facts. Which are:

Article 50 was invoked on 29 March 2017 and as a consequence the UK was due to leave at the end of March 2019.

In spite of having a majority with its allies in parliament, the Conservative Party was unable to persuade all of its own side to vote for the agreement it negotiated with the EU. The great majority of the rebels who stopped us departing last March were Leavers, not Remainers.

The make-up of the 2017 parliament was decided, like all parliaments, by the reply the public gave when asked who they wanted to represent them. In 2019 Boris Johnson decided he didn't like the answer the public gave two years earlier and persuaded the HoC to allow the question to be asked again, in the hope that the public gave the 'right' answer this time.

For various reasons they did and we leave on 31 January 2019.

Your claim about Remainers delaying departure for three years is therefore simply wrong. The delay was 10 months and was primarily caused by Leavers.

If you disagree with any of the above, tell me. But I fully expect you to ignore it. It's the way it's done.

hardly worth worrying about but i guess a bit of face saving eases the pain for you
regards
DF

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

...you mean like the extremist rump of those Leave enthusiasts who can't stop themselves from posting silly, gloating, provocative comments and images?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5TqIdff_DQ
regards
DF

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

If, after the 31st Jan, we have left the EU, paid the divorce bill, completed the 'implementation period', agreed the border policies for the Irish sea border, negotiated the EU trade deal and replaced the other 40 EU trade deals, then yes, I think it will be archived.

And if Johnson claimed to be able to do that, in that timescale, I would bet there are still a fair few on here that would believe him

regards
DF

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

You know neither of those are true. As the referendum was advisory, there was nothing the court could do, whereas had it been mandatory it would have been void. It wasn’t thrown out, but proved to be corrupt,

It was the Common Market, but Ted Heath was always up front about closer integration with preparation beginning even prior to 71 with decimalisation of our currency.

You waffle well just tweaking the truth slightly to appear genuine but it is still waffle. Cummings would be proud.
Have you applied to work for him yet?

You sound so bitter , why not accept democracy you may feel better about yourself ?
regards
DF

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Usually futile but maybe better than we think it is. I haven't changed my mind about Brexit and the vote but I've learnt things from both sides of the argument. It would be nice if the debate could be in the same spirit as the face-to-face conversations many of us have with opposite-view friends but some on here feel the need to indulge in keyboard ranting and childish windups. There are a couple of posters who deliver interesting points and I respect their views but they clearly have only contempt for mine. That doesn't upset me but it is a waste, and might say more about what drives some Brexiteers than the points they actually make. If anything has caused me to drift away it's that. Not to worry.

(I admit I would like Ppf exterminated though.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxD-5z_xHBU:hilton:
regards
DF

 

[daveinplzen]

Bless

 

[Baldseagull]

You know neither of those are true. As the referendum was advisory, there was nothing the court could do, whereas had it been mandatory it would have been void. It wasn’t thrown out, but proved to be corrupt,

It was the Common Market, but Ted Heath was always up front about closer integration with preparation beginning even prior to 71 with decimalisation of our currency.

You waffle well just tweaking the truth slightly to appear genuine but it is still waffle. Cummings would be proud.
Have you applied to work for him yet?

Cummings is looking for weirdo's and misfits, Pastafarian is unfortunately over qualified though.

 

[Baldseagull]

Bless

It will take PPF till the 30nd of February to work out something is wrong.

 

[CHAPPERS]

What an EXCELLENT use of money.

[tweet]1216997851978440704[/tweet]

 

[A1X]

I would bet a lot of money that those people who want money spent on making Big Ben bong are the same people who look at food banks and think "it's sad but I don't want any of my taxes going up to ****ing pay for it".

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Yet only last year people on here were remaincrowing about the peoples vote march in London while the silent majority were at home with their feet up ,we all know how that turned out though
Regards
DF

 

[Deleted member 22389]

I would bet a lot of money that those people who want money spent on making Big Ben bong are the same people who look at food banks and think "it's sad but I don't want any of my taxes going up to ****ing pay for it".

How much have you given to charity over the last few years?

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

How much have you given to charity over the last few years?[/QUOT

He needs as much charity as he can get on this thread, the last rites of remaniacs being played out now on this thread
Regards
DF