Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

PM May only has two Brexit options left


The Truman show
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, stevewinn said:

I guess its just misunderstood. Its amazing what passes as Democracy for some people. meeting in secret, unable able to see who voted for what, power vested in the unelected commission, the same commission who make legislation, making the EU parliment the only parliment in the world that is unable to initiate legislation. :o

It might be misunderstood but, what is much worse, people like you deliberately misrepresent and malign it. There is nothing sinister about meeting behind closed doors: all governments do it, as does the UK cabinet.

The EU Commission might initiate legislation but it is subject to scrutiny by the EU parliament and is appointed and can be dismissed by parliament. The legislation proposed by the Commission must pass a Parliamentary Committee where it is amended before being voted into law by the EU Parliament. The EU Parliament is in democratic control of proceedings at all times.

Go and learn the facts of the matter before coming on here spouting half-truths and lies in pursuit of your own distorted and politically motivated agenda. For someone with so much to say about the EU your ignorance of it is telling. Quite obviously, therefore, you choose to prostitute your personal integrity by promoting a false image of the EU when simple facts about it are so easily and readily verifiable.

Edited by Ozymandias
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of interest - with the allegations about wrong doing circulating at the moment - I ask a hypothetical question - if it is shown that the referendum was not fair because of say 'significant' financial shenanigans by the leave vote - would that be a reasonable justification to re-run the referendum?

Edited by RAyMO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

Out of interest - with the allegations about wrong doing circulating at the moment - I ask a hypothetical question - if it is shown that the referendum was not fair because of say financial shenanigans by the leave vote - would that be a reasonable justification to re-run the referendum?

well people were obviously lied too and the main instigators Boris and Gove were also part of the vote leave campaign, the very same organisation that funnelled money to Cambridge Analytica. so at the very least there should be an investigation and if found guilty there should be another vote. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ozymandias said:

It might be misunderstood but, what is much worse, people like you deliberately misrepresent and malign it. There is nothing sinister about meeting behind closed doors: all governments do it, as does the UK caninet.

The EU Commission might initiate legislation but it is subject to scrutiny by the EU parliament and is appointed and can be dismissed by parliament. The legislation proposed by the Commission must pass a Parliamentary Committee where it is amended before being voted into law by the EU Parliament. The EU Parliament is in democratic control of proceedings at all times.

Go and learn the facts of the matter before coming on here spouting half-truths and lies in pursuit of your own distorted and politically motivated agenda. For someone with so much to say about the EU your ignorance of it is telling. Quite obviously, therefore, you choose to prostitute your personal integrity by promoting a false image of the EU when simple facts about it are so easily and readily verifiable.

You find no problem with unelected commissioners meeting in secret, voting in secret, how do we, as you and i directly elect the Commission please explain.

While were on the subject how do we, as in you and i the people directly elect and unelect the head of the EU 'our' President. please explain.

is it more Democratic to give away sovereignty to a foreign political institution that is not directly elected by the people. the trouble with the EU is this fact unlike domestic politics and Democracy the people are unable to elect or unelect the EU as the EU is not a Government. All 3 areas of the EU the Council, Commission and President all unelectable by the people and this is where the power resides, the Parliament is a front to Democracy. it only fools the naive.

8 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

Out of interest - with the allegations about wrong doing circulating at the moment - I ask a hypothetical question - if it is shown that the referendum was not fair because of say 'significant' financial shenanigans by the leave vote - would that be a reasonable justification to re-run the referendum?

Its been looked into twice already by the electoral commission and everything found to be legitimate. I find it hard to believe that looking at it a third time is going to find anything different. 

Desperate times for the remoaners. no coincidence this story pops up after the News the UK and EU agree to phase 2 and orderly withdrawal. they know they cant change course as seen with Gina Miller. so clutching at straws continues.

Face it the UK is leaving the EU and is never rejoining, because to rejoin would be to accept the EU in full. it would be joining on worse terms than our current membership, i.e joining the Euro, losing the opt-outs we had as current members. So its over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

So its over

Its not over till the fat lady sings. But the question was hypothetical - if this happened would a new referendum be in order. Or should it be just marked down to experience and learn for next time?

BTW I have no doubt after listening to Davis that you will get a very soft Brexit wrapped up in words as hard as nails.

ETA but as they say Brexit is Brexit.

Edited by RAyMO
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

Its not over till the fat lady sings. But the question was hypothetical - if this happened would a new referendum be in order. Or should it be just marked down to experience and learn for next time?

BTW I have no doubt after listening to Davis that you will get a very soft Brexit wrapped up in words as hard as nails.

ETA but as they say Brexit is Brexit.

We dont have to be Hypothetical, The Result of the Referendum is being enacted. Democracy is a b****** to some.

As for what type of Brexit, well, were leaving the Customs Union, Single Market. that's what i believe the Remain side class as Hard Brexit. - We just call it Leaving.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The key for me is alignment - the more alignment the softer the brexit.

Oh just because something is democratically decided upon doesn't mean I have to like it or support it. Just that I must accept it. I do accept it, I just don't like or support it.

Edited by RAyMO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

The key for me is alignment - the more alignment the softer the brexit.

What is the definition of Soft Brexit these days? Alignment? Does that mean NOT leaving the Customs Union and Single market.....  I thought not, So still leaving, these are all just false hopes. Since the Refendum nothing as gone the way of the Remainers its been an absolute joyous watch. The Gina Miller court case was possibly the best highlight, they thought they'd stop Brexit all that happened was they made it even more legitimate - water tight, and it was a double bonus as it kicked Nicola Sturgeon's SNP in the nutts.  :lol: two birds one stone.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RAyMO said:

Out of interest - with the allegations about wrong doing circulating at the moment - I ask a hypothetical question - if it is shown that the referendum was not fair because of say 'significant' financial shenanigans by the leave vote - would that be a reasonable justification to re-run the referendum?

The lies came from the government, there were people giving their own opinion but it was nothing compared to the extended scare campaign pumped out by the Tories it cost nearly £10,000,000 just for the scare pamphlet sent to every house, if the government had told the truth millions more would have voted leave.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The government is not being accused of breaking election / referendum law though

 

Edited by RAyMO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@stevewinn its good to see you are enjoying the whole Brexit thing. At least we have that in common - though admittedly from totally different perspectives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

The government is not being accused of breaking election / referendum law though

 

That doesn't excuse them from lying and as i said without the scare mongering the leave vote would have been massive.

Edited by hetrodoxly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RAyMO said:

The government is not being accused of breaking election / referendum law though

 

That's because they timed it just right releasing it before the official start date of campaigning, otherwise they'd have fallen foul of the rule. £7 million was the limit £9million was the leaflet drop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stevewinn said:

You find no problem with unelected commissioners meeting in secret, voting in secret, how do we, as you and i directly elect the Commission please explain.

While were on the subject how do we, as in you and i the people directly elect and unelect the head of the EU 'our' President. please explain.

Executive authority lies with the Council of Ministers made up of the democratically elected heads of the member states, including your own Prime Minister Theresa May. It decides the day-to-day running of the EU and its future direction and development.

The real power in the EU lies with the European Parliament made up of the democratically elected MEPs from each member state. They ultimately decide on all EU law.

The EU Commission is just a Civil Service Executive approved and scrutinised by Parliament and tasked with running the EU's affairs on behalf of the Council and the people of Europe and proposing legislation within the terms of the treaties.

And the whole enterprise is bound by the terms of those treaties that were agreed by and between the member states.

The EU is democratic and has checks and balances on power. If you feel aggrieved for lack of a vote then look to your own successive governments, not ghe EU. As far as you and I are concerned I have have had a greater opportunity to participate in EU democracy than you ever had.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Captain Risky said:

well people were obviously lied too and the main instigators Boris and Gove were also part of the vote leave campaign, the very same organisation that funnelled money to Cambridge Analytica. so at the very least there should be an investigation and if found guilty there should be another vote. 

Lied to its about campaign money not the content. plus They dont do re-runs, if any campaign group are found breaking the rules its dealt with in the form of fines. :D

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

 The Gina Miller court case was possibly the best highlight, they thought they'd stop Brexit all that happened was they made it even more legitimate - water tight, and it was a double bonus as it kicked Nicola Sturgeon's SNP in the nutts.  :lol: two birds one stonee.

How childish and inappropriate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

Executive authority lies with the Council of Ministers made up of the democratically elected heads of the member states, including your own Prime Minister Theresa May. It decides the day-to-day running of the EU and its future direction and development.

The real power in the EU lies with the European Parliament made up of the democratically elected MEPs from each member state. They ultimately decide on all EU law.

The EU Commission is just a Civil Service Executive approved and scrutinised by Parliament and tasked with running the EU's affairs on behalf of the Council and the people of Europe and proposing legislation within the terms of the treaties.

And the whole enterprise is bound by the terms of those treaties that were agreed by and between the member states.

The EU is democratic and has checks and balances on power. If you feel aggrieved for lack of a vote then look to your own successive governments, not ghe EU. As far as you and I are concerned I have have had a greater opportunity to participate in EU democracy than you ever had.

 

All very well, now point to were you and i, the people directly voted for the Commission, the President and council? how do we the people elect and unelect them. What is that your muttering? we cant oh dear. Democracy EU style. no-wonder the sham doesn't sit well with the British people.

You point to Council of ministers, and the Parliament and i've pointed out many times if you take the Council almost all voting is done by QMV, that means that the UK as 29 votes Malta for example as 3. which all seems fair until someone points out that per head of the population the Maltese have 15 times more voting power compared to the UK, when it comes to the Parliament its a mere 10 times. This is a gerrymandering voting system, which is designed to push through the will of the unelected Commission, President and Council.only the naive would support such a system and believe its democracy. 

 

Edited by stevewinn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

All very well, now point to were you and i, the people directly voted for the Commission, the President and council? how do we the people elect and unelect them. What is that your muttering? we cant oh dear. Democracy EU style. no-wonder the sham doesn't sit well with the British people.

 

 

No wonder, indeed. They don't even get to vote on the founding treaties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

No wonder, indeed. They don't even get to vote on the founding treaties.

I've added to my post above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

All very well, now point to were you and i, the people directly voted for the Commission, the President and council? how do we the people elect and unelect them. What is that your muttering? we cant oh dear. Democracy EU style. no-wonder the sham doesn't sit well with the British people.

You point to Council of ministers, and the Parliament and i've pointed out many times if you take the Council almost all voting is done by QMV, that means that the UK as 29 votes Malta for example as 3. which all seems fair until someone points out that per head of the population the Maltese have 15 times more voting power compared to the UK, when it comes to the Parliament its a mere 10 times. This is a gerrymandering voting system, which is designed to push through the will of the unelected Commission, President and Council.only the naive would support such a system and believe its democracy. 

 

QMV is designed to accommodate the interests and wishes of smaller states in the European Union and prevent larger, more populous states like Germany, Britain and France, from dictating voting patterns and driving the whole enterprise according to their agenda. Britain wants to take control back because, among other reasons, it cannot have its own way in Europe all the time.

All democratic systems and processes are not perfect. A perfect system is unworkable because it would require a vote by everyone on everything, everytime. Such a system would gridlock and get very little done. If you believe in democracy then you have to accept compromise and a willingness to work cooperatively and in a bona fide way with others, something the UK no longer wishes to do in Europe.

Edited by Ozymandias
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Ozymandias said:

What utter rubbish! Don't you know that in regard to EU legislation the Commission is tied to what is allowed by treaty. All EU law is solely based upon the treaties democratically agreed by and between EU members. The Commission cannot initiate legislation that does not comply with these treaties. 

In countries like Ireland the national electorate gets to vote and debate on these treaties and to force the EU to amend the terms of treaties if they are not considered in our national interest. No EU treaty has ever been foisted on the Irish people against their will unless and until its terms were changed. The process is admirably democratic.

In the UK the people have NEVER been asked to vote on a EU treaty. It would seem that the lack of democrzcy is not actually a EU characteristic but may be the fault of politics in individual member states.

The people of the UK were never even asked if they wanted to join the EEC in 1973. It became a political issue AFTER the UK joined and they were subsequently asked through a referendum in 1975. The ONLY other time the will of the British people has ever been tested by referendum was on Brexit in 2016.

The people of the UK have NEVER been asked to vote on any European treaty. It was the UK parliament that ratified each treaty. Brexit is a consequence of that lack of democratic participation. European legislation is UK law because the UK adopted (and helped to frame) those treaties and the laws that have followed from them.

Go learn some facts before you accuse the EU of being an oligarchy and undemocratic.

I am not sure what you are saying "utter rubbish" to. I made 2 factual statements and you go off on a tangent to try to hide the fact that you are not amenable to being faced with a factual argument.

My turn, the bolded part is "utter rubbish", just to give you a clue: since 1973 there have been 11 Referenda held in the UK. I will leave you to figure out what they were for...

...as i have adequately shown that the EU is an Oligarchy in accordance with ANY definition you care to come up with then, I rest my case

Edited by keithisco
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, keithisco said:

I am not sure what you are saying "utter rubbish" to. I made 2 factual statements and you go off on a tangent to try to hide the fact that you are not amenable to being faced with a factual argument.

Factaul statements?! Factual argument?! You don't say! Well, let's look at the facts.

1 hour ago, keithisco said:

My turn, the bolded part is "utter rubbish", just to give you a clue: since 1973 there have been 11 Referenda held in the UK. I will leave you to figure out what they were for...

The bolded part is factually incorrect. There have been 13 referenda since 1973, three of which were truly n ational in nature and only two of these, as I said in a former post, pertained to European issues. It was quite clear in that post that I was referring to the latter two and not to any of the others. 

1 hour ago, keithisco said:

...as i have adequately shown that the EU is an Oligarchy in accordance with ANY definition you care to come up with then, I rest my case

You haven't shown that 'the EU is an Oligarchy' at all. What you have done was make an assertion to that effect based upon your quoted OED definition of an oligarchy as 'a small group of people having control of a country or organisation'. In actual fact (there's that word again) the EU is patently NOT an oligarchy. There is no small group of people who control the EU. It is a union of sovereign nations whose elected representatives in the EU Parliament exercise control. Surely by a small group of people you cannot mean the Council or the Commission? The individuals on the Council are the political leaders of their democratic countries and are constrained by democratic processes at home. They are not dictators. If by a small group of people you mean the Commssion, they are a civil service executive answerable to parliament and capable of being dismissed by it. Far from being an oligarchy, the EU is a democratic organisation founded on internationally agreed treaties and constrained by those treaties. Those are the facts.

Now it's your turn again. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Ozymandias said:

Go and learn the facts of the matter before coming on here spouting half-truths and lies in pursuit of your own distorted and politically motivated agenda

It may be out of context, but that would make a great t-shirt slogan. Perhaps it could be sold to some of those people who are continually marching in protest at America's Tyrant Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, RAyMO said:

Out of interest - with the allegations about wrong doing circulating at the moment - I ask a hypothetical question - if it is shown that the referendum was not fair because of say 'significant' financial shenanigans by the leave vote - uld that be a reasonable justification to re-run the referendum?

Putin. <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'

20 hours ago, RAyMO said:

 

BTW I have no doubt after listening to Davis that you will get a very soft Brexit wrapped up in words as hard as nails.

ETA but as they say Brexit is Brexit.

I'd like a nice moist Brexit that's that sort of consistency that if you prod it with a finger, it gives slightly, but doesn't cave in or crumble. And isn't so over-cooked that it's all burnt on the outside.

Maybe they could get Mary Berry to advise on exactly how long it should be left in the oven for? ^_^

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.