kuro68k wrote: » The British government is going to take it right to the cliff edge and hope that someone else compromises. Of course they have their excuses already lined up if no-one does, only real question is who they will blame.
Infini wrote: » So long as your country still has a presence on our island and is causing us problems then yes exactly. Give the rest of it back and take the village idiots with you and then its a different story.
bilston wrote: » Not sure if it's from the same poll as above but on 14/15 Nov a You Gov poll gave Remain 55% and Leave 45%...once you start getting consistent polls showing 55%+ for Remain then surely a second referendum has to be seriously considered.
Scoondal wrote: » The opinion of Irish people is totally irrelevant. The citizens of United Kingdom voted to leave Europen Union. Does anyone here have a problem with this ?
Scoondal wrote: » Of course not ! The people voted. Mrs. May ( a remainer) has negotiated a "deal" according to the wishes of her people. Parliament will now decide to accept this "deal" or to reject it. Again I say, Brexit is not complicated. UK will leave EU. I will be celebrating on 30 March because I want less UK influence in Ireland.
bilston wrote: » Scoondal wrote: » Okay. For those people who do not understand. In June 2016, the people of United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union. The UK government has set 29 March 2019 as the date of leaving EU. Some here seem to have a problem with a government being answerable to the citizens. These are facts. A good deal would be nice, of course. But democracy should be upheld because the stated opinion of citizens is the most powerful mandate a government can receive. The stated opinion of 17.3 million citizens on one given day, as opposed to the opinion of the 16.1 million citizens on one particular given whose opinion now is completely irrelevant. I'm also fed up with the term "the will of the people"...no it's the will of some of the people. While I'm here a guy from You Gov was on the radio about an hour ago commenting on a You Gov poll which showed that out of 20,000 respondents across every GB constituency, out of three choices, Remain, May Deal and No Deal, 600 seats gave Remain as first preference. The BBC presenter started the interview by saying something along the lines of...let's ignore the Remain option as it's irrelevant...no it's not fecking irrelevant, it's common fecking sense...
Scoondal wrote: » Okay. For those people who do not understand. In June 2016, the people of United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union. The UK government has set 29 March 2019 as the date of leaving EU. Some here seem to have a problem with a government being answerable to the citizens. These are facts. A good deal would be nice, of course. But democracy should be upheld because the stated opinion of citizens is the most powerful mandate a government can receive.
Tell me how wrote: » What, specifically, makes you think people here have a problem with democracy? Would you accept a democratic vote on the deal which Theresa has negotiated? Of course not ! The people voted. Mrs. May ( a remainer) has negotiated a "deal" according to the wishes of her people. Parliament will now decide to accept this "deal" or to reject it. Again I say, Brexit is not complicated. UK will leave EU. I will be celebrating on 30 March because I want less UK influence in Ireland.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » Are these rules not violated in all elections. Does anybody think that no foreign money ever comes into other UK elections?
Remain campaigners have been fined £19,000 for failing to declare their spending properly during the EU referendum campaign. The Liberal Democrats were fined £18,000 by the Electoral Commission, near the legal maximum fine of £20,000, mainly for “failing to provide acceptable invoices or receipts for 80 payments”. “Where the rules are not followed, transparency is lost which is not in the public interest or as parliament intended,” said Bob Posner, the Commission’s legal counsel. Meanwhile, the official Remain campaign, then known as Britain Stronger in Europe, now Open Britain, has paid a £1,250 fine imposed for not providing three invoices and for declaring some spending in aggregate rather than individual payments. The Electoral Commission, Britain’s electoral watchdog, is still undertaking high-profile investigations into the official Leave campaign, Vote Leave, and another major Brexit group, Leave.EU and its founder Arron Banks.
Vote Leave has been fined £61,000 and reported to the police by the Electoral Commission after the watchdog found “significant evidence” of coordination with another campaign group, BeLeave. The watchdog said it had imposed punitive fines on Vote Leave because it said the group had refused to cooperate fully with its investigation and declined to be interviewed. Its former chief executive, Matthew Elliott, had previously alleged it was the Electoral Commission that had refused to cooperate. Vote Leave called the findings “wholly inaccurate”.
Theresa May was yesterday urged to confirm whether or not ministers blocked an MI5 probe into Brexit donor Arron Banks. Labour’s Ben Bradshaw wrote to the PM a day after it was announced the National Crime Agency was investigating the source of £8million funding Mr Banks apparently pumped into the Leave campaign. It has been claimed security services were stopped from investigating Mr Banks in 2016.
Scoondal wrote: » I'm trying to simplify a fact. The people of U.K. have voted to leave E.U.. That is a fact, not a simplistic slogan. Do you accept democracy ?
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Could you expand your argument beyond simplistic slogans?
demfad wrote: » https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=n_wPxAd41js&app=desktophttps://www.bbc.com/news/uk-46460194 Good BBC Video and article (Finally) on the search for the source of Aaron Banks £8 million funding of Brexit: £2 Million to 'Better for the Country limited' and £6 million to LeaveEU. The ICO referred the matter of the sources of Banks Referendum Funding to the UK National Crime Agency saying they suspected crimes had taken place. Money for British elections must transparently come from the UK. Banks money allegedly came from a company called Rock Services of London but may have come from Rock Services in the Isle of Man. As the accounts for these companies are not transparent and the money is not coming from the company Banks says it was: crimes have been committed by providing False information to the Electoral Commission in order to use illegitimate funding. The £8 million spent by Banks was not legitimate. To understand how serious this is this amounts to more than the entire official Leave campaign allowance. The Russian ambassador to the UK who Mueller described as a central figure in Trump-Russia had met with banks and Wigmore several times at key points leading up to the Referendum. Other Russian officials met with them including a Russian spy deported after the Skripal poisoning. These meetings continued after the referendum at key points in Trump campaion (Day Bannon was appointed Campaign Manager, they met Ambassador in London day after "Bad Boys" Trump tower photo). They were offerred Gold mining deals backed by Sberbank. Banks runs diamond mines in SA which are perfect for laundering money. Potential Illegal spending by Leave campaigns to date:Vote Leave to BeLeave: £1m Crime + Fine LeaveEU/BFTCL : £8m Highly likely illegal source and Crime committed (regardless of Russian connection or not) =£9 million. This doesn't include undeclared benefits in kind by Cambridge Analytica to LeaveEU, or payments by DUP/VeteransForLeave to AIQ or DUP dark £1/2m In a high Court case, This Oxford Professor alleges that the Vote Leave/AIQ illegal overspend alone was enough to swing the Vote to Leave. Thats just a million. We are looking at probably £9m. There is no way in hell that Leaves would have won without cheating and committing crimes.https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/vote-leave-referendum-overspending-high-court-brexit-legal-challenge-void-oxford-professor-a8668771.html
Water John wrote: » Really hope Ch4 go ahead with an interesting debate. Easy to be better than listening to May and Corbyn bore our lights out. Also, Ch4 more impartial and flying pigs will be shot down. How could some one like Andrew Neil chair a debate? He took a good swipe at Carole Cadwallader, of Aaron Banks inquiry. Wonder why that was???
Scoondal wrote: » Leave means leave. Simply, no lies, no trickery, the votes were counted. NEWS : UK voted to LEAVE EU. Do you live in a cave ?
tuxy wrote: » If the majority still want to leave now that they know about the lies and trickery of the leave campaign then no, no problem.
Scoondal wrote: » If the "remainers" were too lazy to get up off their backsides, that's their problem now. The people voters have spoken. End of story.
flatty wrote: » A large swathe of the British public are elderly, bitter and a bit dim. This sadly is just a fact. The best of British are a match for anyone, and are wonderful people, but there are huge numbers of people of the type who complain that the Spanish spoil their holidays by not speaking English. Wrt to teresa may refusing to directly answer a question about delaying the vote, I cannot ever remember her answeringq a direct question about anything. If her govt put it to the people that the initial referendum was flawed by illegal Russian finance and interference, she would instantly be given a popular mandate for a rerun of the referendum. She will do absolutely everything in her power to avoid one, as it threatens what she perceives as her place in history. She doesn't give a flying fcuk about anything else. There will be a second referendum over her political corpse. That is all. She is an ardent brexiteer.
Scoondal wrote: » Does anyone here have a problem with this ?
rdsopix wrote: » 1.- Doubt that most leave voters would like to hear that their vote was influenced by Russian meddling and lies. 2.- Not sure that Teresa May is just worried about her place in history books as the Brexit PM. Maybe it is her husbands financial interests, just like with Rees-Mogg and many other self-styled anti-establishment figures .
Scoondal wrote: » The people voted. Result. Do not insult the majority of ordinary people. Even now the people who want to leave EU are more entrenched because of the point of view that the parliament will vote against the agreement. The people want their voice heard.
flatty wrote: » A large swathe of the British public are elderly, bitter and a bit dim. This sadly is just a fact. The best of British are a match for anyone, and are wonderful people, but there are huge numbers of people of the type who complain that the Spanish spoil their holidays by not speaking English. Wrt to teresa may refusing to directly answer a question about delaying the vote, I cannot ever remember her answering a direct question about anything. If her govt put it to the people that the initial referendum was flawed by illegal Russian finance and interference, she would instantly be given a popular mandate for a rerun of the referendum. She will do absolutely everything in her power to avoid one, as it threatens what she perceives as her place in history. She doesn't give a flying fcuk about anything else. There will be a second referendum over her political corpse. That is all. She is an ardent brexiteer.
