Miller and Major.........

arcobob

Member
Location
Norfolk
The Jocks can fudge off and rule their own country , suits me sir
I'll give them 2 years before the begging bowl comes out .

EDIT , this statement is aimed at the SNP and it's followers .
Less if the EU refuses to look after them 😕. What about the wall :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 

Agrivator

Member
The referendum was UK wide vote. If it had been thought through carefully, there would have been no attempt to measure the result by Constituency. It is that which has caused all the division and helped prolong the argument.

Just imagine, if in a General Election, the results for each Constituency were broken down further by City or Town or Village
 

MiJ

Member
Location
w.mids
The referendum was UK wide vote. If it had been thought through carefully, there would have been no attempt to measure the result by Constituency. It is that which has caused all the division and helped prolong the argument.

Just imagine, if in a General Election, the results for each Constituency were broken down further by City or Town or Village
Don’t think there should have been a problem if elected MP had represented his/her constituents’ majority vote.
 
Johnson apparently lied to the queen about the reasons for proroguing parliament. If Brexit is so reasonable a course of action, then why do its supporters keep having to break the law, twist the rules, and act like complete nutjobs just to make it happen?

This mess is almost certainly going to lead to a breakup of the union.

Well blow me down with a feather .. Letwin & Berkmoo created "New Rules" just for themselves out of thin air. A literal coup where they hijacked the democratically elected government of the UK.

They then proceeded to create a law of their own making.


All done without having to create their own Political Party, Publish a Manifesto, Public Hustings, Media Interviews and getting votes from the electorate.

Those who have acted in this manner should never ever be allowed near Parliament.
 
Last edited:
Now im beginning to get concerned that the next aim is to pee brexiteers off so much with this continual injustice and interruption that some lose their cool and resort to violence!! And you can be sure you know how that will be portrayed (UK media) with yet another election just round the corner.

Maybe but I can't see anyone moving on these people en masse yet. Could be 2 years left of this pathetic display.

I don't mind myself what they get up to and IMHO it will continue to lend weight to what I think will happen.

Eventually after this circus has totally destroyed themselves someone will attempt to get elected based on reforming the lot ..
 

Danllan

Member
Location
Sir Gar / Carms
And there lies the problem of a truly divided nation.
Yes, I agree, but it wasn't an equal divide in the Referendum, was it?

Here's on for @Danllan

If article 50 is part of the EU communities act (?) , it must be covered by EU law, which I understand trumps UK law, making the new UK law compelling Boris to beg for an extension, at odds with article 50 itself?
That's been raised a few times, but it doesn't really stand up because the Exiting the EU leg' is all UK derived, and it is that which obliges a / the Government to do the necessary.

There is no democratic mandate for a no deal Brexit. Efforts to stop that happening are both rational and in the public interest.

You can claim a democratic mandate for leaving certainly. Although its a pretty hypocritical position to find yourself in, if you're scared stiff of a second vote in case the public will might have changed.
There is a greater democratic mandate for leaving with no deal than remaining in, for however many 'extensions' it takes for your lot to build up the courage to actually rescind earlier leg', keep the UK in the EU and insult the majority of the voters.

I am not scared stiff of a second vote and will support your calls for one, if you wish, once the first has been respected. But, on what basis could the result of a second vote be respected, assuming a 'remain' majority, if that of the first had not, and how could a third vote be denied?

As far as I'm aware there are no laws on prorogation ...... @Danllan , yet the scottish judges have adjudged there is , English judges have said no law gas been broken but have deferred the decision the the Supreme court .

Seems the scots have selected their judges very carefully for this case .............. roll fudgein eyes
Scots Law is not my field, but my understanding is that they have made no ruling about prorogation in any way but, rather, upon the validity of the advice which resulted in the prorogation.
 

Agrivator

Member
Yes, I agree, but it wasn't an equal divide in the Referendum, was it?

There is a greater democratic mandate for leaving with no deal than remaining in, for however many 'extensions' it takes for your lot to build up the courage to actually rescind earlier leg', keep the UK in the EU and insult the majority of the voters.
You said ''There is a greater democratic mandate for leaving with no deal than remaining''.

Exactly. Can you not become a spokesman for the silent majority and at last bring a bit of logic for the media to mull over.

Just another example of the willingness of the media to cause alarm: the Yellowhammer report has already been well discussed and in fact published more-or-less in its current form by the Sunday Times. It is a worst-case scenario, yet the media is now presenting it as if it's a new and realistic prediction of what will happen in the event of no Deal.
 

Danllan

Member
Location
Sir Gar / Carms
You said ''There is a greater democratic mandate for leaving with no deal than remaining''.

Exactly. Can you not become a spokesman for the silent majority and at last bring a bit of logic for the media to mull over.

Just another example of the willingness of the media to cause alarm: the Yellowhammer report has already been well discussed and in fact published more-or-less in its current form by the Sunday Times. It is a worst-case scenario, yet the media is now presenting it as if it's a new and realistic prediction of what will happen in the event of no Deal.
And become a politician!? I think the media, being mostly remain supporters and out for a headline anyway, have rather shot themselves in the foot with crying wolf in Project Fear (Part 1). Whining snowflakes will whine and be snowflakes regardless, and afterwards, when all is well, they'll pretend it never happened.
 

FlyBy

Member
Brexit represents the end of the old empire! The establishment or indeed the "old boys network" are fighting tooth and claw too overturn the democratically reached Leave vote. Projection is being widely used, that is accusing those you wish to discredit (Boris) of doing the exact thing (dirty tricks) that you are engaging in. And of course with a pro remain media the slant is continually given in the liberal lefts favour.

Now im beginning to get concerned that the next aim is to pee brexiteers off so much with this continual injustice and interruption that some lose their cool and resort to violence!! And you can be sure you know how that will be portrayed (UK media) with yet another election just round the corner.

What the old guard cant grasp is that their loss of power is part of a wider movement far more powerful than their ability to stop and reverse it. All empires come to an end, even the Great Roman one. I truly believe there is an unseen hand that intervenes and tips the balance against those who rule at critical moments in history and we are most definitely in those times now.
Ah yeah, I’m sure populists like Jacob Rees-Mogg and Boris Johnson are just fighting tooth and nail to break down the ‘old guard’ system. All those bracing afternoons on the rugger fields of Eton definitely prepared them to break apart the establishment and the old boys network.

Seriously, do you even believe this stuff yourself? If so, would you be interested in buying some magic beans I have for sale?
 

FlyBy

Member
So now it is hypocritical to disagree with the call for a second referendum. In simple terms hypocritical means insincere. David Cameron called the first referendum, not any member of a leave campaign but those with an interest voted in good faith. Who is calling a second one? The people who lost the first of course. Why don`t you all get mummy to put the toys back in the pram and wheel you off into a dark corner. Insincere indeed.
If you scream about the will of the people while simultaneously being scared to ask the people again in case they’ve changed their minds, then you’re being a hypocrite.
 

FlyBy

Member
There is a greater democratic mandate for leaving with no deal than remaining in, for however many 'extensions' it takes for your lot to build up the courage to actually rescind earlier leg', keep the UK in the EU and insult the majority of the voters.

I am not scared stiff of a second vote and will support your calls for one, if you wish, once the first has been respected. But, on what basis could the result of a second vote be respected, assuming a 'remain' majority, if that of the first had not, and how could a third vote be denied?
The idea that democracy means a single vote and then no possible change of mind until the outcome is enacted is nonsensical and runs counter to every other part of our democratic system. Situations change, information becomes available that wasn’t previously the case, and declaring that we must follow a course of action because years ago people thought it was the best action to take is frankly stupid.

If I ask the group whether we should go to the local Chinese restaurant or Indian restaurant and then prior to our visit we find that our initial choice has had a terrible food safety report, then should we go anyway because that was what we voted for?

Since 2016 we have discovered a huge amount about the potential consequences of leaving with various types of deal or no deal. Unlike some people I’m perfectly happy for a second referendum to include a no deal option, and if that’s what people vote for then that’s exactly what the government should do. Now we know all the consequences if people want to just walk away, then let them do exactly that. But don’t tell me people aren’t allowed to have a say three years later with the final decision in sight, because that isn’t democracy. Either the people want to leave under these conditions or they don’t. Ask them.
 
If I ask the group whether we should go to the local Chinese restaurant or Indian restaurant and then prior to our visit we find that our initial choice has had a terrible food safety report, then should we go anyway because that was what we voted for?

You stated that if we voted to go to the restaurant everyone would have food poisoning and die.

They didn't.

You then said the sky would fall down and we would be instantly incinerated. And if we didn't obey other little kittens would be tortured.

We don't believe liars.

We think you just want to dictate to everyone they should go down the pub despite losing the vote.

And that's because you own shares in the business and we know your pub has a history of 40 years of food poisoning.

QED.
 

arcobob

Member
Location
Norfolk
Scots Law is not my field, but my understanding is that they have made no ruling about prorogation in any way but, rather, upon the validity of the advice which resulted in the prorogation.
This validity of advice bit concerns me rather. There has been a lot of invalid advice flying about over the years which has never been brought to court to defeat governments. Is this the new way forward I wonder and if so the legal profession will reach mammoth proportions.
 

Scribus

Member
Location
Central Atlantic
You said ''There is a greater democratic mandate for leaving with no deal than remaining''.

Exactly. Can you not become a spokesman for the silent majority and at last bring a bit of logic for the media to mull over.

Just another example of the willingness of the media to cause alarm: the Yellowhammer report has already been well discussed and in fact published more-or-less in its current form by the Sunday Times. It is a worst-case scenario, yet the media is now presenting it as if it's a new and realistic prediction of what will happen in the event of no Deal.
The established media is too far gone up its own little tract to mull over logic. If it suits them to declare that black is in fact white then they will do so, and then they wonder why nobody takes them seriously. Yesterday there was an article in the Irish Independent that was a rather premature attempt at the canonization of Phil Hogan, our shiny new EU trade commissioner. Why did such an ass lickin' piece appear in the rag? One of the major reasons, I suspect, is that it is all part of the Irish political establishment's bid to lay the blame for any Brexit problems firmly at the feet of the British. However, I do get the feeling that back down here on ground level the supposed magic of the media isn't having the desired effect, the brexit induced antagonism towards the UK is not quite as sharp as it was.
 

Scribus

Member
Location
Central Atlantic
This validity of advice bit concerns me rather. There has been a lot of invalid advice flying about over the years which has never been brought to court to defeat governments. Is this the new way forward I wonder and if so the legal profession will reach mammoth proportions.
Careful now, ye'll have the lad Dellan musing over the colour of his next Ferrari.
 

Henarar

Member
The referendum was UK wide vote. If it had been thought through carefully, there would have been no attempt to measure the result by Constituency. It is that which has caused all the division and helped prolong the argument.

Just imagine, if in a General Election, the results for each Constituency were broken down further by City or Town or Village
should have took all the unopened boxes to one place and chucked the lot in one big heap and counted them there
 

Qman

Member
Location
Near Derby
If you scream about the will of the people while simultaneously being scared to ask the people again in case they’ve changed their minds, then you’re being a hypocrite.
If we had already left and wanted to have a vote is one thing, we haven't left yet and then the question wouldn't be leave or remain.

If I went into a restaurant and found it was filthy and expensive and where I was expected to pay for other diners meals, I could walk out.

What part of 17.4 million being more than 16.2 million do you not understand?
 

Forum statistics

Threads
158,212
Messages
3,615,277
Members
39,956
Latest member
Tom Brazil

Creamy, untreated and in a glass bottle: Britain gets a taste for old-fashioned milk

  • 52
  • 0


Creamy, untreated and in a glass bottle: Britain gets a taste for old-fashioned milk

Written by Freya Herring

Dairy farmers cash in on a growing trend to replace both homogenisation and plastic with a revival of the traditional ways
“When the milk price crashed five years ago, we were in a bad...
Top