Also in the news

[Captain...]

5 minutes ago, MattP said:

Terrible to see more Russian interference in our democracy. 

 

 

12 votes, those dastardly Russians. 

 

More likely to be expats, I’m pretty sure that Russian hackers would be a bit more sophisticated than that?

 

Even I could set up a vpn and register a uk email address and spam a few votes.

 

 

[Guest MattP]

4 minutes ago, Captain... said:

12 votes, those dastardly Russians. 

 

More likely to be expats, I’m pretty sure that Russian hackers would be a bit more sophisticated than that?

 

Even I could set up a vpn and register a uk email address and spam a few votes.

It was a joke. 

 

What is actually the point of this petition? We know there are 16 million remainers out there, possibly more. No one is shocked a million people have signed it.

 

If it hits 5 million what relevance or point does it have? We leave in 8 days with either a Deal or No Deal as it stands which is exactly what the purpose of invoking article 50 was.

 

There is no majority support for this in the country or in the HoC.

[Benji]

1 hour ago, Strokes said:

I’m not against a second referendum, I am against one that would include Mays deal vs Remain. As both options are unappealing. I think if the public has the opportunity to decide the fate of brexit, all the options should be on the table.

Agree with this - we can't just assume people didn't mean "no deal" when they voted Leave when it's the closest option to what was actually debated.  Also to think people will sit and read the Withdrawal Agreement is ridiculous - as with the first referendum we'd again be asking people to vote on something they are too ill-educated and unqualified to vote on.  Would need to be a "you now have a better idea of what's going on, did you mean/do you still mean no deal?".  That might mean having a "leave v remain" vote with a sub-question of "if it's leave then do you want no deal or May's deal"?  It just all becomes so ridiculous though and you probably wouldn't even be able to get HoC consensus on what question(s) should even be asked.

 

 

[purpleronnie]

2 hours ago, MattP said:

What about the emergency budget, 300,000 job losses and immediate recession in the aftermath of a vote to leave? What about the "dangerous fantasy" of the EU army? What about the denial of more integration? 

 

If you want to believe we were conned that's fine, no leave voter will lose any sleep over it - but we will have a chuckle at your side thinking it's vote wasn't also based on a pack of lies.

 

I'm just glad we won so we found out for sure. It would have awful to see you get away with it.

 

P.S The NHS is actually going to get even more than that now - unfortunately given the lack of funding everywhere else.

But you have got away with it...isn't that the same thing?

 

If people think lies weren't told by both sides then they're deluded, but the side that wins in the battle of the lies will always be pointed at about those lies and the losers (us) will forget the our own lies....I hope that most remain and leavers weren't influenced by it, I took little notice of it all and had my own reasons for wanting to stay, I'm sure some were but enough to sway the vote?..who knows?

 

What happens if Brexit all goes tits up?  Will brexitiers own it?  Acknowledge they were wrong or blame Mrs mays deal or whatever deal we get if any?  Or do they care? would they accept certain economic downshifts if it meant being outside the EU.

 

I will happily accept I was wrong if Brexit goes well, even though i'll be sad not to be part of the EU I'll be happy it worked out well....how it will benefit those who voted leave remains to be seen but I hope it does.

 

We really do need to stop all this finger pointing and name calling, aren't we all sick of it after 3 years.

 

 

 

 

Edited 21 March 2019 by purpleronnie

[Guest MattP]

10 minutes ago, purpleronnie said:

But you have got away with it...isn't that the same thing?

 

If people think lies weren't told by both sides then they're deluded, but the side that wins in the battle of the lies will always be pointed at about those lies and the losers (us) will forget the our own lies....I hope that most remain and leavers weren't influenced by it, I took little notice of it all and had my own reasons for wanting to stay, I'm sure some were but enough to sway the vote?..who knows?

 

What happens if Brexit all goes tits up?  Will brexitiers own it?  Acknowledge they were wrong or blame Mrs mays deal or whatever deal we get if any?  Or do they care? would they accept certain economic downshifts if it meant being outside the EU.

 

I will happily accept I was wrong if Brexit goes well, even though i'll be sad not to be part of the EU I'll be happy it worked out well....how it will benefit those who voted leave remains to be seen but I hope it does.

 

We really do need to stop all this finger pointing and name calling, aren't we all sick of it after 3 years.

It's not the same thing no - had we voted Remain we would never have known all the financial forecasts were just scare stories. Cameron and Osborne would have smugly gone back to work and declared themselves heroes etc 

 

If Brexit goes tits up it will up to people to decide who to blame - I get the feeling Theresa May will be the one who takes the flak but there might be as much fire on parliament as a whole. Who knows? In hindsight it was ridiculous not to put a Brexiteer candidate in charge of it. Boris legged it but Leadsom, Gove and Fox all wanted the gig.

 

Certainly agree on most of what you have said though, certainly about forgetting our own lies and pointing at others.

[Legend_in_blue]

https://legalresearch.blogs.bris.ac.uk/2019/03/why-a-no-deal-brexit-on-29-march-is-unconstitutional-not-the-legal-default/#more-1394

 

Interesting read.

[Captain...]

41 minutes ago, MattP said:

It was a joke. 

 

What is actually the point of this petition? We know there are 16 million remainers out there, possibly more. No one is shocked a million people have signed it.

 

If it hits 5 million what relevance or point does it have? We leave in 8 days with either a Deal or No Deal as it stands which is exactly what the purpose of invoking article 50 was.

 

There is no majority support for this in the country or in the HoC.

If it becomes the most signed petition on you.gov? There is no majority for anything, No deal, Mat’s deal, Corbyn, the Government doesn’t even have a majority. The only certainty is that we don’t know anything for certain.

 

Ask the people again, Parliament can’t decide, put all the options on the table, remain, May’s Deal, Corbyn’s deal, anyone else’s deal and No deal. X number of rounds of voting least popular gets removed as an option. 

 

Then we get our say and the actual will of the people is put in place.

 

May repeatedly asking for the same deal and threatening us with no deal is not democratic.

[Strokes]

40 minutes ago, Benji said:

Agree with this - we can't just assume people didn't mean "no deal" when they voted Leave when it's the closest option to what was actually debated.  Also to think people will sit and read the Withdrawal Agreement is ridiculous - as with the first referendum we'd again be asking people to vote on something they are too ill-educated and unqualified to vote on.  Would need to be a "you now have a better idea of what's going on, did you mean/do you still mean no deal?".  That might mean having a "leave v remain" vote with a sub-question of "if it's leave then do you want no deal or May's deal"?  It just all becomes so ridiculous though and you probably wouldn't even be able to get HoC consensus on what question(s) should even be asked.

 

 

I wonder what the outcome would be if the nation did choose leave again.

The way you shape that referendum would obviously exclude remain voters from picking deal or no deal. I genuinely think leave voters would pick no deal.

[purpleronnie]

14 minutes ago, MattP said:

It's not the same thing no - had we voted Remain we would never have known all the financial forecasts were just scare stories. Cameron and Osborne would have smugly gone back to work and declared themselves heroes etc 

 

If Brexit goes tits up it will up to people to decide who to blame - I get the feeling Theresa May will be the one who takes the flak but there might be as much fire on parliament as a whole. Who knows? In hindsight it was ridiculous not to put a Brexiteer candidate in charge of it. Boris legged it but Leadsom, Gove and Fox all wanted the gig.

 

Certainly agree on most of what you have said though, certainly about forgetting our own lies and pointing at others.

Ah i didn't know if you meant it was awful if the remain lies had won over the leave lies...couldn't see the difference.  Of course you can now see the lies/scare stories ...and so can we.

 

 

[Guest MattP]

1 minute ago, Captain... said:

If it becomes the most signed petition on you.gov? There is no majority for anything, No deal, Mat’s deal, Corbyn, the Government doesn’t even have a majority. The only certainty is that we don’t know anything for certain.

 

Ask the people again, Parliament can’t decide, put all the options on the table, remain, May’s Deal, Corbyn’s deal, anyone else’s deal and No deal. X number of rounds of voting least popular gets removed as an option. 

 

Then we get our say and the actual will of the people is put in place.

 

May repeatedly asking for the same deal and threatening us with no deal is not democratic.

We have a referendum on this with the highest turnout ever - with the biggest mandate ever, that's not going to overturned by a petition.

 

They had a chance to put it to the people again, it got a measly 84 votes in parliament that made May's deal look impressive.

 

The EU is only offering us an extension until May 22nd - even if there was now a majority in parliament for things you want it doesn't appear we can do it. 

 

If they didn't want to choose between a deal and no deal they should never have invoked article 50, but they did.

[Kopfkino]

16 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

https://legalresearch.blogs.bris.ac.uk/2019/03/why-a-no-deal-brexit-on-29-march-is-unconstitutional-not-the-legal-default/#more-1394

 

Interesting read.

 

Steve Peers, who has been quite an authoritative voice on these things, ripped this apart as nonsense on Twitter

[Captain...]

1 minute ago, MattP said:

We have a referendum on this with the highest turnout ever - with the biggest mandate ever, that's not going to overturned by a petition.

 

They had a chance to put it to the people again, it got a measly 84 votes in parliament that made May's deal look impressive.

 

The EU is only offering us an extension until May 22nd - even if there was now a majority in parliament for things you want it doesn't appear we can do it. 

 

If they didn't want to choose between a deal and no deal they should never have invoked article 50, but they did.

We can legally revoke article 50 at any point, bollocks to any deadlines. We can revoke article 50 have another referendum a general election get some semblance of order and a plan in place and then trigger it again if we want.

 

We are heading down a ridiculous path one that could seriously damage this country’s standing as a financial and political force. 

 

The fact that it only got 84 votes is the exact reason why we need this petition and the march on Saturday and any other means available to put pressure on the government to stop being a bunch of stubborn clueless clowns. They asked for our opinion, only a small minority really wanted the referendum. Put the decision making in the hands of incompetents. Fannied about with pointless meetings, general elections that served to cost us money and undermine the very person that called it. They are making a balls up of it in our name the least they can do is actually ask us if we want what they have delivered in our name. 

 

This has has just been such a cluster fvck of incompetence that satirists are quitting in their droves. 

 

Are you satisfied with what has happened since you voted to leave?

[Buce]

46 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

https://legalresearch.blogs.bris.ac.uk/2019/03/why-a-no-deal-brexit-on-29-march-is-unconstitutional-not-the-legal-default/#more-1394

 

Interesting read.

 

I’m pleased you found it interesting because it implies you understood it. 

 

Could you please give me the idiots guide?

[Guest MattP]

25 minutes ago, Captain... said:

We can legally revoke article 50 at any point, bollocks to any deadlines. We can revoke article 50 have another referendum a general election get some semblance of order and a plan in place and then trigger it again if we want.

 

We are heading down a ridiculous path one that could seriously damage this country’s standing as a financial and political force. 

 

The fact that it only got 84 votes is the exact reason why we need this petition and the march on Saturday and any other means available to put pressure on the government to stop being a bunch of stubborn clueless clowns. They asked for our opinion, only a small minority really wanted the referendum. Put the decision making in the hands of incompetents. Fannied about with pointless meetings, general elections that served to cost us money and undermine the very person that called it. They are making a balls up of it in our name the least they can do is actually ask us if we want what they have delivered in our name. 

 

This has has just been such a cluster fvck of incompetence that satirists are quitting in their droves. 

 

Are you satisfied with what has happened since you voted to leave?

Not at all - but that certainly doesn't mean I'm going to allow a minority of hardcore remainers to overthrow everything.

 

There is no majority desire to revoke article 50 inside or outside or parliament and it certainly shouldn't happen because people are signing petitions or going on walks with the dogs dressed up in the EU flag.

 

As for doing it to hold another election or referendum? How stupid do you think people are? 

 

If you do get your way and this is revoked you'll end up wishing you didn't. 

[Captain...]

20 minutes ago, MattP said:

it certainly shouldn't happen because people are signing petitions 

Why not? That’s a greater reason than Cameron had to call the referendum. 

 

I’m not saying we should revoke article 50 because 1.2 million people have signed a petition but should still be an option on the table.

[Guest MattP]

2 minutes ago, Captain... said:

Why not? That’s a greater reason than Cameron had to call the referendum. 

 

I’m not saying we should revoke article 50 because 1.2 million people have signed a petition but should still be an option on the table.

A petition is a greater reason than a manifesto commitment he was elected into office on?

 

Sorry but that's absolutely insane. 

Edited 21 March 2019 by MattP

[yorkie1999]

2 hours ago, MattP said:

Terrible to see more Russian interference in our democracy. 

 

 

VPN

[Legend_in_blue]

1 hour ago, Buce said:

 

I’m pleased you found it interesting because it implies you understood it. 

 

Could you please give me the idiots guide?

 

However this deal ends up, should it end in some sort of deal, it doesn't satisfy anyone.

 

I'd go with that.

 

 

 

[Captain...]

50 minutes ago, MattP said:

A petition is a greater reason than a manifesto commitment he was elected into office on?

 

Sorry but that's absolutely insane. 

I’m talking about the reason why it was in the manifesto. Cameron offered the referendum to appease the ukippers who polled fewer than 1m in 2010

[Grebfromgrebland]

https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-hundreds-of-gagging-orders-taken-out-by-government-11671933

 

So lots of gagging orders hurriedly being taken out so that the public don't find out how bad brexit is going to be and when it is bad we don't find out the full extent.

 

This is absolutely terrifying for anyone who cares about this country.

 

The NHS has already been banned from publishing there findings of any type of brexit because it's so horrific and will upset people. 

 

Supermarkets have plans in place to deal with looters and are stockpiling. The army is in standby to help the police and curfews have been discussed. 

 

AND THIS IS THE INFO THEY HAVEN'T PUT GAGGING ORDERS ON! 

 

I'm sorry but if brexit was a good thing for the people then all these plans wouldn't be needed.

 

No other country in the world would inflict this upon themselves. 

[Guest MattP]

28 minutes ago, Captain... said:

I’m talking about the reason why it was in the manifesto. Cameron offered the referendum to appease the ukippers who polled fewer than 1m in 2010

They won a national election in 2014 with 4.3 million votes.

 

Of course he was entitled to do it - can't exactly argue the public didn't want it either given it produced the biggest democratic exercise in British history.

[Grebfromgrebland]

30 minutes ago, Captain... said:

I’m talking about the reason why it was in the manifesto. Cameron offered the referendum to appease the ukippers who polled fewer than 1m in 2010

Though it was more to appease the right wing press and ultimately the who made brexit happen. Maybe he knew it was Mercer, Putin and Banks from the beginning maybe he didn't. 

[Innovindil]

7 minutes ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-hundreds-of-gagging-orders-taken-out-by-government-11671933

 

So lots of gagging orders hurriedly being taken out so that the public don't find out how bad brexit is going to be and when it is bad we don't find out the full extent.

 

This is absolutely terrifying for anyone who cares about this country.

 

The NHS has already been banned from publishing there findings of any type of brexit because it's so horrific and will upset people. 

 

Supermarkets have plans in place to deal with looters and are stockpiling. The army is in standby to help the police and curfews have been discussed. 

 

AND THIS IS THE INFO THEY HAVEN'T PUT GAGGING ORDERS ON! 

 

I'm sorry but if brexit was a good thing for the people then all these plans wouldn't be needed.

 

No other country in the world would inflict this upon themselves. 

Why on earth would this come as even remotely a surprise? Don't you remember a few years back where one MP telling people to fill a jerry can or two of petrol ended up causing a UK wide petrol crisis? When if he hadn't have said anything, nobody would have even noticed anything out of the ordinary.

 

Use your noggin ffs.

[Kopfkino]

41 minutes ago, Captain... said:

I’m talking about the reason why it was in the manifesto. Cameron offered the referendum to appease the ukippers who polled fewer than 1m in 2010

 

Okay that might be the choice Cameron made but by criticising it you are implicitly saying the people shouldn't have got a say on the country's relationship with the EU? Do you believe the people shouldn't have had a say and if so why? 

[Guest MattP]

10 minutes ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

Though it was more to appease the right wing press and ultimately the who made brexit happen. Maybe he knew it was Mercer, Putin and Banks from the beginning maybe he didn't. 

Mercer voted Remain.