(05-11-2016 07:48 )SecretAgent Wrote: [ -> ]^^ Sadly it's not a good post because it is based upon a fundamental misunderstanding standing of the judges decision. They have (as has been repeatedly said) reaffirmed that under the law the decision to invoke Article 59 must be taken by Parliament. They have made no comment on the rights or wrongs of Brexit because it has no relevance to their decision. They have reaffirmed that Parliament is sovereign which is what many Brexiteers wanted. All the ruling does is say the current democratic procedure according to the laws of this land must be followed.
I may personally regret the country voted for Brexit but the point now is surely to exit the EU in the best way possible for the country. Full debate in parliament will help that.
I would just say that the intemperate attacks on the 3 judges are highly objectionable. What relevance to their decision is the fact that one of them is gay or where they previously worked? Death threats for upholding the law? I'm afraid you Brexiteers do your cause no good if you support the rule of the mob. Surely you are better than that? [/php]
i'd like to know who were the fucking Remainers who paid for the fucking challenges in the first place who's fucking flush with money on their side of the bloody argument? to bring that would cost at least $500,00 or more and I doubt they won't rreveal sources because of fears of backlashes How dare they meddle with the process now. They should have challenged the result the day after it happened not three/four months down the line Those judges are corrupt anyway bet they took a backhander or two to rule in their favour!!
you have proof they are corrupt do you ?
sick of people claiming its the death of democracy. the judges are only going what is writtern in law. theresa may cant just rewrite 500 years of history. we fought a civil war for the system we have now where parliament is sovereign.
if theresa may wants to use the royal pergoative then why dont we just go back to a monarchy and give the queen full powers again
will be ironic if she loses the appeal she might have to go to the european court of justice and use the system she doesnt like
^^I despair when I read such claptrap. I actually had thought Brexiteers valued the rule of law in this country. Seems I was wrong. You accuse the judges of being corrupt which is a scandalous accusation. This sort of uninformed commentary is shameful.
I suggest you calm down, stop making outrageous accusations and let Brexit take place under the rule of law in this country which is what Brexiteers said they wanted to be sovereign.
(05-11-2016 10:52 )HannahsPet Wrote: [ -> ]you have proof they are corrupt do you ?
sick of people claiming its the death of democracy. the judges are only going what is writtern in law. theresa may cant just rewrite 500 years of history. we fought a civil war for the system we have now where parliament is sovereign.
if theresa may wants to use the royal pergoative then why dont we just go back to a monarchy and give the queen full powers again
will be ironic if she loses the appeal she might have to go to the european court of justice and use the system she doesnt like
]I doubt if May could win in the European courts it wouldn't rule in her favour then having the referendum if that happened in the first place was just a pointless exercise because no matter who won it there are many who will feel they have enough power to block anything like Article 50
If one of them worked for Tony Blair then he Is bloody corrupt in my book Wait and see if it comes to light that they took backhanders to make that decision then we'll see who's right and I feel the Queen should get involved and make her feelings known and rubber stamp the act May needs It would be the only way she can push the process forward
(05-11-2016 11:00 )SecretAgent Wrote: [ -> ]I suggest you calm down, stop making outrageous accusations and let Brexit take place under the rule of law in this country which is what Brexiteers said they wanted to be sovereign.
I think the problem is alot of leavers don't actually know what sovereignty means.
They just swallowed the 'take back control' guff literally.
Heres some info and Facts :
https://www.parliament.uk/about/how/role/sovereignty/
Parliamentary sovereignty is a principle of the UK constitution. It makes Parliament the supreme legal authority in the UK, which can create or end any law. Generally, the courts cannot overrule its legislation and no Parliament can pass laws that future Parliaments cannot change. Parliamentary sovereignty is the most important part of the UK constitution.
interesting this line " and no Parliament can pass laws that future Parliaments cannot change " surely Article 50 is one way we cant change it once we have triggered it " i suppose we can always apply to join EU again
(05-11-2016 07:48 )SecretAgent Wrote: [ -> ]^^ Sadly it's not a good post because it is based upon a fundamental misunderstanding standing of the judges decision.
You keep repeating yourself, we have read what you have put and do actually understand it.
(05-11-2016 08:09 )The Silent Majority Wrote: [ -> ]Are you saying he's corrupt? Now who's clutching at straws.
I claimed nothing, but if this is true, there is a clash of interest.
(05-11-2016 07:48 )SecretAgent Wrote: [ -> ]I may personally regret the country voted for Brexit but the point now is surely to exit the EU in the best way possible for the country. Full debate in parliament will help that.
The vote was 52% to 42%
A lot of people didn't know what they were voting for, lazy young people who didn't have an app to vote, a lot that regret it and most that didn't understand it.
If a referendum was taken again the out come might be for remain, and by a long way.
MP's now have an absolute golden opputunaty to reverse an advisory decision only vote.
If they truely think leaving the EU would be so bad for the UK then they would be mad to adopt the attitude you have, and some are doing.
Yes, britian would be finnished and the laughing stock of the world and yes they would be the absolutely bitch of the EU, and they would have absolutely no say in freedom of movement, not even to negotiate on the matter, BUT, if would still be in the EU.
