Does it matter that we have a lying, dishonest Prime Minister?

[wobs]

Shamelessly stolen quote:
"Troubling times for single mothers as calls grow for Boris to spend more time with his families."

 

[ellal]

"Troubling times for single mothers as calls grow for Boris to spend more time with his families."

Pole dancers have also been put on alert.

Cobra have called it 'operation shafted'...

 

[festive]

You would therefore have no objection to another EU referendum then?

Part of me says what's the point because as every attempt has been made to nullify the referendum including pulling out small print to say it's not binding in any way to parliament.

If it isnt why was article 50 triggered.

That's the fcked up issue here.

I'll say it again till this is resolved. This could resolved If every party sat round the table. But they all have their own agenda. And the majority of pro remain and opposition have the house to ransome.

And will continue to do the same when parliament resumes.

It's like the captain has been pulled off (so to speak) and the staff are taking turns at the helm thinking they can steer it better half want to go to France half to Dover.. the rest of the country are stuck on board and just want to get off and becoming more desperate.

I would vote again but I would first like to see the backing of the supreme court that whatever is agreed would mean our parliament are legally obliged to act on the ruling without hindrance either way. Uhoh here we go...litigation city.

 

[Notch7]

That's the fcked up issue here

The real issue is that in 2016 Brexit was sold on emotive slogans that werent true.

for 3 1/2 years the Tory government has been truing to achieve a Brexit on benefits that dont exist.

And now we are in a situation where the Tory PM and cabinet are perpetuating lies whilst justfying their position by pitting people versus parliament.

The 'will of the people' is the 'will to have a Brexit that cant give them what they want'.

That is the real fcked up issue.

 

[ellal]

I would vote again but I would first like to see the backing of the supreme court that whatever is agreed would mean our parliament are legally obliged to act on the ruling without hindrance either way.

As I have said before, I agree it should be a legally binding vote not an advisory one...

And that the issue shouldn't be revisited for a considerable time, unless there was a similar majority in parliament to the fixed parliament act...

But in order to do that the UK desperately needs a written constitution...

Not one based on conventions, precedents, and 'gentlemen's agreements'!

 

[festive]

No Both sides fought the referendum on the basis they would regard the result as binding; and it was on that basis that people voted. Are you saying the public were misled by remain also?

 

[motorbiking]

We do all understand the difference between illegal and unlawful?

I ask, because people seem to be thinking Johnson committed some sort of fraud.

 

[Notch7]

No Both sides fought the referendum on the basis they would regard the result as binding; and it was on that basis that people voted. Are you saying the public were misled by remain also?

The leave side sold a Brexit that cant be achieved.
So the leave side fought the referendum on a lie.

It wont take back control
It wont get back sovereignty -we never lost it
It get back fishing rights
It wont give money to the NHS
It wont stop immigration.



The 2016 referendum should simply be considered unlawful.

 

[JP_]

The 2016 referendum should simply be considered unlawful.

It already has been:

"The Electoral Commission, charged by parliament with ensuring the 2016 EU referendum was fair, unlawfully tilted the playing field in favour of leave. That’s the striking consequence of a high court decision from this morning."
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/14/judges-brexit-vote-eu-referendum-vote-leave

and Why is Britain turning blind eye to Leave side’s lawbreaking?

 

[festive]

The leave side sold a Brexit that cant be achieved.
So the leave side fought the referendum on a lie.

It wont take back control
It wont get back sovereignty -we never lost it
It get back fishing rights
It wont give money to the NHS
It wont stop immigration.



The 2016 referendum should simply be considered unlawful.

No I disagree with all above it will it depends how you frame your tediously framed argument.. now buzz off please fly.

 

[ellal]

I ask, because people seem to be thinking Johnson committed some sort of fraud.

Similar actions taken in other areas of the world in the illegal shutting down of a governing body would probably be seen as an attempted coup by the UK!

 

[festive]

We do all understand the difference between illegal and unlawful?

I ask, because people seem to be thinking Johnson committed some sort of fraud.

Of course of course...

As we all know this is nothing but an attempt in any way to stop Brexit. Any other day of the week John D etc would be wetting themselves over an ex tory PM who prorogued parliament himself to testify against someone who err prorogued parliament. Anyone including Gary Glitter I'm sure would be applauded.if he spoke out against Brexit ..desperate times....

 

[Notch7]

We do all understand the difference between illegal and unlawful

Only one of them is a sick bird

 

[Notch7]

No I disagree with all above it will it depends how you frame your tediously framed argument

Of course you disagree.
Your choice supportive bias prevents you understanding reasoned argument.

I would ask you to provide a valid counter argument.....but you havent got one.

You were told Brexit would bring back control, but it will only lose control. -I expect you feel a bit silly now

 

[SirGalahad]

We do all understand the difference between illegal and unlawful?

I ask, because people seem to be thinking Johnson committed some sort of fraud.

Do we understand the difference between a binding and non binding referendum.

Johnson is a fraud.

Unlawful but not illegal.