Europe, Referendum & Brexit (formerly Europe..IN or OUT??)

(06-11-2016 17:02 )Scots Napoleon Wrote:  You really are a complete buffoon aren't you. I really wonder whether you can be considered a person of sound mind.

Parliament didn't vote for the people of Britain to decide. They voted for an advisory referendum.

Dear boy, do please read what I put. I'm not talking about the Judges decision, but the decision for the first referendum, which, rather puzzlingly you agree. This was whether we left the EU or not, we know it's advisory, many people, including myself, have stated this on inumerable occasions; you then accuse people not being of sound mind?

You personally insult me, however, what I stated was from the the internet (you and your buddy really do struggle with this concept don't you?). What I posted there was a quote, hence the quotation marks, I asusme you must have missed those.

I know you can hide behind the mods and be extremely insulting to me. basically becasue it's me. But ask yourself this, have I insulted you personally? Do you want me to start?

Just to show that what I write are not invenions of my own devising, viddy below.

http://lionheartnews.com/2016/11/why-i-w...eresa-may/

Pay particuler attention to the paragraph:

"This may appear to be a debate about process, and the legal argument is complex,

but in reality there is an important principle at stake. Parliament voted to put the decision about our membership of the EU in the hands of the British people."

You're starting to irk me, stop doing this, it could get very messy.

I have nothing against you personally, you are mearly words on a screen and have no significance to me than that.

I will always be bemused why you and your buddy habitually try and turn any debate with me into an argument and insulting slanging match; I can only assume there must be something a little amiss with the pair of you.


The point remains, that it was parliament that put the decion into the hand sof the public, that decision was made, the PM was about to impliment it, now it's a matter of, whoe, hang on, this is a matter for the pm's not the public.

(06-11-2016 17:35 )wackawoo Wrote:  what I stated was from the the internet

It may be from the internet, but you know it isn't true and have admitted it isn't true, so why are you repeating it?

I don't blame people for personally insulting you, because there has to be a limit to anyone's patience.

(06-11-2016 17:46 )barracuda Wrote:  It may be from the internet, but you know it isn't true and have admitted it isn't true, so why are you repeating it?

I don't blame people for personally insulting you, because there has to be a limit to anyone's patience.

What isn't true? How would I know it isn't true? What is your evidence it isn't true?

That the Judge is alledged to have strong links with the EU? That this is a golden chance for the MP's to turn around the Brexit vote if they wish? That the judges have ruled the royale perogative is not legal and parliament has to be consulted? that it was paliament in the first place that sent it to the public vote? (clearly thinking they would win), these are the things I have stated. Help me out here, what exactly isn't the truth?

Has for patience, I've had to have the patience of a saint on this tread, (so has those who aren't a remain) it's clearly a matter of if you don't agree with us well will attack and it as always been that way on this thread, even before the vote took place.

I've not agree with a lot that has been said on here, on both sides, and have come in for a hell of a lot of personal abuse but I don't go personally insulting anybody for their opnions.

Firstly, it's juvenile and childish (calling names should be left in the play ground I would have thought), secondly, if any other member were to personally insult any other member in the way I have over the post two pages of this thread alone they would be banned, sin bined or at least be given warnings.

And no, even if I 'knew it not to be true' it doesn't give any body the right to be personally insulting so stop trying to make excuses.

On another note, have you ever stoped to wonder why it is that out of all the threads I post on, there isn't a single problem with any member of this firum until may oppnions are not welcome by a very tiny minority. There's thousands on this forum and time and again when there's a problem it's nearly always the same few people attacking, less than 5 but always the same ones.

May be it's less about what I write and my opnions expressed on a subject but more about their ludicrous personal problem with me and looking for oppurtunities to attack.

(06-11-2016 21:26 )wackawoo Wrote:  What isn't true? How would I know it isn't true? What is your evidence it isn't true?

This isn't true :

(06-11-2016 17:35 )wackawoo Wrote:  The point remains, that it was parliament that put the decion into the hand sof the public

Parliament NEVER put the decision into the hands of the public.
As you yourself have admitted, the referendum they agreed to was only ever ADVISORY, it was never legally binding, therefore it was only ever an OPINION, not a DECISION, it is a subtle but significant difference both legally and constitutionally.
No doubt this should have all been clarified in the first place, then we wouldn't be in this mess, but it wasn't, probably because Cameron never expected the result to go against him.

(07-11-2016 05:41 )munch1917 Wrote:  Parliament NEVER put the decision into the hands of the public.
As you yourself have admitted, the referendum they agreed to was only ever ADVISORY, it was never legally binding, therefore it was only ever an OPINION, not a DECISION, it is a subtle but significant difference both legally and constitutionally.
No doubt this should have all been clarified in the first place, then we wouldn't be in this mess, but it wasn't, probably because Cameron never expected the result to go against him.

Like I say, my quote was a direct quote from the link above.

The then government did indeed put whether to LEAVE the EU decision into the hands of the public, and the public voted overwhemingly to leave.

That was the decision, to leave.

YES, it was advisory, that was pretty much one of the first things the remainers claimed, and somihitng I have repeated. However, the then governmant of the day FULLY ACCEPTED that decision. Not only did Cameroons but his sucessor.

What we are talking about here is a point of law (the loophole), this is why I have stated if they want to reverse the decision they now have a golden opputunity. The problem is with all these law challanges and dilly dallying it is not doing the stabilization process any good by preventing either negotiations to leave or confirmation of staying. It's clear the rest of the EU just want the UK to damn well make it's mind up.

Imagine this scenario, that back in the early 90's the government called a referendum to see if the public agreed to go to war in Iraq and they didn't, but then the ruling was it was only advisory and not not lawfull and the MP's then decided to go to war any way.

This all a bit like parents asking their kids if they want to go to Alton Towers or Longleat, all the kids want to go on the rides at Alton Towers, but the Parents want to go and look at the aimnals so the go to longleat. It is pointless and worthless in asking.

This would make referendums totally void and usless. I wonder what the reation would have been in Scotland if their referendum had been to leave the UK but it was ignored any way?

But the Scottish Referendum was a legally binding one same with the AV

was cameron who made the brexit one non legally binding

This article is from 6 October, but it's a good read for anyone in Scotland.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/only-independen...ow-1585175

Hmmmmm gotta laugh

the 350million a week we were paying EU is now 365 Million because the Exhchange rate and we pay it in Euros Well done your Brexit lot

So thats another 800 million we are giving them a year

Or you could look at it another way. When we leave the EU we'll then be saving 365 million euros a week...

(23-11-2016 14:30 )Charlemagne Wrote:  When we leave the EU we'll then be saving 365 million euros a week...

Unlikely I think. When we leave the EU we'll probably still pay the fee, the same as Norway do.