Brexit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DangerMouse

I have long been uncertain what my position is, I tend towards remain but there is so much uncertainty, but if you are a good representation of the kind of people who want to leave WP, you're doing an excellent job of convincing me to be a solid remainer!

Thank you :D

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeoffB

Haha! Absolutely - that's exactly how I've felt for the past three years. Reading the posts on this Forum have just made me even more convinced.

---

Thirded. And I deliberately don’t read most of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by millipede

Thirded. And I deliberately don’t read most of it.

---

Fourthed and never has so much bollocks been written by so few :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stolly

Fourthed and never has so much bollocks been written by so few :)

---

Never has democracy been abused by so many.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike T

Para 58 - distinguishes between motive and reason.

Para 61 - they could not find any evidence that a reason was given.

So not contradictory.

---

Now being objective. There was no law of "reasonable time for reason" until the supreme court made it, then found boris guilty of breaking it, in violation of powers. It cannot make law.

So why is it they suppose Boris should have given a reason, if the law did not require him to do so? If he had been compelled by law to give a reason he would have said, "I need a queens speech, the centre piece of which is the a deal I have yet to negotiate. It actually takes months (ask Ms May), I only have a couple of weeks because of statute on date, and all my ministers are needed. They cannot be in the commons and negotiate a deal.

A perfectly good reason. Majors idea that a queens speech only takes four days for this complexity, indeed as the master proroguer of history , he now opposes proroguing just shows how low remainer integrity is.

The court invented the need for a reason, it never existed, and is why Boris failed to give one. It is the sole preserve of parliament not a court to make law.

If you want to talk law, lets talk it.

I can cite a thousand examples to prove "reasonableness" forms no part of the law unless explicity put there by law makers.
.
For example - The law of contract does not impose any bounds on whether two way consideration is reasonable , only that it exists. If I buy a car for £1, it is just as binding as buying at valuation, and all the same remedies are available for breach. For the word "reasonable" consideration to be inserted would need parliament to act. No court can put into the law what is not there, not even "reasonableness". And that has formed many case precedents to confirm what I just said is true. Courts cannot put there what is not there, even reasonableness.

The court clearly acted ultra vires, in breach of separation of powers, making an overtly political judgement, when many of the judges are conflicted by EU stipend. The establishment will stop at nothing to overturn democratic will. Even the master of the rolls adviced that the prorogue was not a matter for courts. So this is not a universal opinion.

I despair of this forum. It is happy to allow wholly distorted views from remainers, but if any brexiter dares to comment on facts it is said to be "oxford debating society". Some of this needs challenging everywhere it is said.

In this thread we will see the complete nonsense that nobody voted for no deal, when parliament did - and the electorate did because if they want to leave, that is the only mechanism open - it is there in A50 as what happens if no deal is agreed.

Other than a speaker intent on constitutional destruction - bercow empowering himself as prime minister, since only the government can decide what primary legislation is voted, it is what government means. Standing order 47 precludes spend of money that is not sanctioned by a minister, the bill commmits the country to spend for the interim. The benn act has no legitimacy because it was the product of malfeasance, an ultra vires action by speaker. No doubt the supreme court would conveniently decide it was not judiciable. The deputy speaker and previous speakers like Boothroyd are outraged by bercows behaviour, and if nothing else the speaker must now be made accountable. He has too much power and has abused it to the point of destroying what it means to govern. The benn act should not be possible unless you first become government by election or by confidence.

What has actually happened is remainsers have broken the first law of democracy. All of you. Which is Losers consent. You cannot have a democratic vote unless losers agree to accept the will of the majority however the vote falls. A second referendum has no legitimacy unless the first is honoured. The lib dems are now a contradiction in terms.

It amazes me that intelligent people still can't see they are being played and this divisive BS is exactly what they want.

We really must stop this pathetic childish playground "you did this" "you did that" if we have any hope as a species!

I am utterly disgusted, sickened, to the core, by the behaviour of all politicians and anyone who joins in this pathetic display of the worst humanity has to offer.

I once again bow out of this discussion because once again I feel attacked by the leave contingent even though I have made it clea that I am quite uncertain and would just like to discuss as rational human beings. It is clear to me now this is not possible.

Good luck to everyone, we are going to need it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DangerMouse

I once again bow out of this discussion because once again

---

You lasted quite a while, I have long since given up on this. I leave them here shouting their toy is not turning out as expected.

Haha, I tried to rise us all above the distractions, misinformation and the inexorable push to divide and conquer, really I did!! I guess I failed - that's okay, it was a tall order, I feel no shame!

Shrugs... whatever happens things will still largely stay the same, the rich will get richer, the poor will become ever more marginalised, public services will continue to be contracted and privatised, the populace will continue to be misled and treated with the contempt it clearly deserves, the corruption and greed will continue and either way our nation will take at least a few generations to recover from this international embarrassment, if it ever does.

I look at the politicians laughing like this is some kind of joke or game, shouting and vomiting their bile and vitriol so vehemently that they are literally spitting at each other in the house of commons and feel nothing but disgust and despair.

I have a confession to make, I didn't vote (I know, but reasons conspired) but as things unfold and become clear to me I am more convinced than ever that this was 100% the right thing to do.

Not in my name!!

I realise I have posted here again after I said I would bow out, but there you have it, maybe I should get into the spirit of saying one thing and doing another as this seems to be the way of the world these days. Hmmm... okay, maybe not :)

I had a fraudulent vote, my 14yr old son was with me and I gave him my voting slip. He voted remain, well it is all about future generations.

Brilliant!!

You are of course absolutely correct :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DangerMouse

I once again bow out of this discussion because once again I feel attacked by the leave contingent

---

I can't see the recent attack you refer to, but hey-ho.

the last 5 posts have been from members who have "bowed out of this". It seems it's their guilty pleasure coming back again, and again, and again....

Maybe we need a Brexiteers Lounge where we can discuss policy, facts and possible outcomes, and a Remainers lounge where they can bitch without anyone challenging them?