Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
So the Law Lords of the Supreme Court have made a decision, but their vote was actually quite split, by eight to three. I think we need to know a bit more about these Law Lords and how they voted.
How old are they? what are their educational achievements? what sex are they? and where do they all live?
I think the votes of the oldest ones should be discounted for a kick-off, how many years will they have to live with their decision, I wonder? Not sure about any Northern Lords having a vote either, some of them have never even met a European.
 
712 said:
So the Law Lords of the Supreme Court have made a decision, but their vote was actually quite split, by eight to three. I think we need to know a bit more about these Law Lords and how they voted.
How old are they? what are their educational achievements? what sex are they? and where do they all live?
I think the votes of the oldest ones should be discounted for a kick-off, how many years will they have to live with their decision, I wonder? Not sure about any Northern Lords having a vote either, some of them have never even met a European.
Click to expand...

Heh. Very good. Although I guess you can console yourself with the thought that - unlike the electorate - the Law Lords have made a career out of not allowing personal bias interfere with making the correct decision.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Heh. Very good. Although I guess you can console yourself with the thought that - unlike the electorate - the Law Lords have made a career out of not allowing personal bias interfere with making the correct decision.
Click to expand...

I suppose 'the establishment' is a bit of a nebulous concept, but insofar as it exists, them feckers is bang in the middle of it.
 
712 said:
So the Law Lords of the Supreme Court have made a decision, but their vote was actually quite split, by eight to three. I think we need to know a bit more about these Law Lords and how they voted.
How old are they? what are their educational achievements? what sex are they? and where do they all live?
I think the votes of the oldest ones should be discounted for a kick-off, how many years will they have to live with their decision, I wonder? Not sure about any Northern Lords having a vote either, some of them have never even met a European.
Click to expand...
Poor attempt.
 
Adisa said:
Didn't know where to post this.
A cnut will always be a cnut.
Click to expand...


Is this his response to MacGregor saying he doesn't want to be on a show with him because he ruins the natural narrative of the show in favour of making it about himself?
 
Ugh, yet again Piers is doing and saying agreeable things. He's having a great week.
 
Aboutreika18 said:
Prolonging the inevitable, I'm afraid. Who in parliament is actually going to vote against it?
Click to expand...

Nobody is saying it will stop Brexit. It's important that it's not "Theresa May's Brexit" though. As I think @MikeUpNorth said, the effects of this will go beyond this Conservative term and as such the other parties should have their say otherwise it's going to be chopped and changed every decade or so which is fecking expensive.
 
It's fun basically because it annoys people like IDS and Julia Hartley-Brewer.
 
Paul Nuttall saying that "though this skirmish has been lost in the courts, the war will be won," strikes me as an...err, threatening statement? Can someone tell this over-dramatic moron we are not at war?

There's a real paranoia and sort of weird single-mindedness about this whole thing from Brexiteers, who seem determined to enact their own unified version of Brexit, with no qualms or disputes from the other side, when that's not at all what was voted for.

The fact it's going to Parliament means MP's can table amendments, suggest changes etc to improve Brexit, and ensure the best possible scenario is offered to the British people. That seems completely fair to me. It's exactly what we voted for...and yet it seems a fair bunch of those who voted Brexit have a fair bit of contempt for the process of British democracy they voted to take back.
 
Cheesy said:
Paul Nuttall saying that "though this skirmish has been lost in the courts, the war will be won," strikes me as an...err, threatening statement? Can someone tell this over-dramatic moron we are not at war?

There's a real paranoia and sort of weird single-mindedness about this whole thing from Brexiteers, who seem determined to enact their own unified version of Brexit, with no qualms or disputes from the other side, when that's not at all what was voted for.

The fact it's going to Parliament means MP's can table amendments, suggest changes etc to improve Brexit, and ensure the best possible scenario is offered to the British people. That seems completely fair to me. It's exactly what we voted for...and yet it seems a fair bunch of those who voted Brexit have a fair bit of contempt for the process of British democracy they voted to take back.
Click to expand...

For some , Brexit has nothing to do with justice, laws, country prospering - for a large section it is only about one thing and we all know what that is.
 
I can't see the ruling making much of a difference. A useful safeguard to prevent May going to extremes but its not going to block Brexit. As it is its going to take a lot of MPs pissing off their own constituents to make any change, Owen Smith has said he'll vote against despite his own constituency voting out. Be interesting to see how many others there is.
 
Smores said:
I can't see the ruling making much of a difference. A useful safeguard to prevent May going to extremes but its not going to block Brexit. As it is its going to take a lot of MPs pissing off their own constituents to make any change, Owen Smith has said he'll vote against despite his own constituency voting out. Be interesting to see how many others there is.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone ever expected that, they just wanted to make sure parliament has a say in Brexit & it's terms rather than May being a dictator.
 
I find it fascinating now to see what deal it is they try to get.

Even more curious to me is the amount of Leave Conservatives who very aggressively rejected the idea of leaving the single market when discussed - are they just going to bend over to Theresa May?
 
Just seen Manchester's Lucy Powell say she will ignore her constituents and vote to trigger Brexit, despite Manchester voting to stay. Utterly unforgivable.
 
decorativeed said:
Just seen Manchester's Lucy Powell say she will ignore her constituents and vote to trigger Brexit, despite Manchester voting to stay. Utterly unforgivable.
Click to expand...
Owen Smith is doing exactly the same but voting to not trigger Brexit, even though his constituents voted to Leave. It's a really shit show at the moment.
 
Last edited:
Sweet Square said:
Owen Smith is doing exactly the same but voting to not trigger Brexit, even though his constituents voted to Leave. It's a really shit show at the moment.
Click to expand...

You'd have thought the Labour party might try to come up with some semblance of general agreement on this. Embarrassing really. Even in spite of his unpopularity you'd have expected to see Corbyn trying to get to grips with this.
 
Cheesy said:
You'd have thought the Labour party might try to come up with some semblance of general agreement on this. Embarrassing really. Even in spite of his unpopularity you'd have expected to see Corbyn trying to get to grips with this.
Click to expand...
He's in the novel position of actually not caring much about an issue that his supporters see as fundamental.
 
I don't think there was any way for Labour to not mess this up. Lib Dems, by doing 2nd referndum, can get committed Europhiles, but Labour doing the same will kill half their seats, consolidate London, and make them effectively a 3rd party.
Labour doing what they are now will leave them uncertain in most of their seats and probably kill London. He chose the worst of 2 suicidal options.

I think I remember someone here suggesting Labour will revive after a Brexit referendum :lol:

Can't remember who or the context, but these issues were pretty foreseeable (and perhaps inevitable no matter the referendum result). Labour needs to learn something from the GOP and Dems on how to keep very diverse interests together.
 
EU's ministry of truth has now added the German publication DWN to their list of "pro-Kremlin disinformation campaign". DWN is a independt online newspaper where 51% is owned by the Swedish Bonnier conglomeration (not pro Putin at all, rather the opposite).

Other publications that now are deemed inappropriate by the ministry of truth from the EU is: Bloomberg, The Nation and Zerohedge.

https://deutsche-wirtschafts-nachri...breitet-faelschung-um-die-dwn-zu-denunzieren/

https://euvsdisinfo.eu/commentary-m...s-of-the-pro-kremlin-disinformation-campaign/

Sorry if this is a bit off topic, but I didn't find a general EU thread to post this. Thought it would be fitting in here though since the EU is painted in such a rosy picture here.
 
SwansonsTache said:
EU's ministry of truth has now added the German publication DWN to their list of "pro-Kremlin disinformation campaign". DWN is a independt online newspaper where 51% is owned by the Swedish Bonnier conglomeration (not pro Putin at all, rather the opposite).

Other publications that now are deemed inappropriate by the ministry of truth from the EU is: Bloomberg, The Nation and Zerohedge.

https://deutsche-wirtschafts-nachri...breitet-faelschung-um-die-dwn-zu-denunzieren/

https://euvsdisinfo.eu/commentary-m...s-of-the-pro-kremlin-disinformation-campaign/

Sorry if this is a bit off topic, but I didn't find a general EU thread to post this. Thought it would be fitting in here though since the EU is painted in such a rosy picture here.
Click to expand...


:wenger:
Zerohedge is (AFAIK) right-libertarian, not pro-Kremlin. Bloomberg and the Nation are too ridiculous to discuss.
 
berbatrick said:
:wenger:
Zerohedge is (AFAIK) right-libertarian, not pro-Kremlin. Bloomberg and the Nation are too ridiculous to discuss.
Click to expand...

Do not know The Nation in detail, but I do know Bloomberg though and how they can be deemed pro-kremlin is beyond me.

Here is the Google translate of the DWN article:

https://translate.google.com/transl...breitet-faelschung-um-die-dwn-zu-denunzieren/

Michael Maier who is the creator of DWN has previously been the editor in chief for "Die presse" and the "Berliner Zeitung", and also the director for "Orkla press" in Germany. DWN is a totally independent and factual publication that now is being presented by the EU as some twisted propaganda tool for Kreml. They've even taken the steps to forge and rewrite some headings from DWN to prove their point, as you can read in the article.

But I won't digress the thread any further. Being contrarian on here is too much work anyways.
 
Stanley Road said:
So do 3 judges not understand the law or was this just a vote?
Click to expand...

It's about interpretation. When a referendum is proposed the parliament has the possibility to make it legally binding or advisory, the former is an act of law in which the parliamentarians give up their power to make the law, so they really should precise it when they want to make a referendum legally binding.
In the case of Brexit, if I'm not mistaken they didn't precise if it was advisory or legally binding which gave both sides the right to claim whatever they wanted.
 
Ubik said:
He's in the novel position of actually not caring much about an issue that his supporters see as fundamental.
Click to expand...

True, but even then you'd have expected him to make some effort to come up with a general, unified position from the party; as it stands he's alienating Remain voters while not doing much to win over Leave voters...while further confirming the disagreements within the party on just about everything.
 
I think the vote will simply confirm the invocation of article 50. At this stage there won't be much option and it won't make much difference. But the final deal will placed placed before parliament in about 2 years' time and that's when there might be more debate, depending on how things have gone up to that point and the agreement on offer. The mood of the country may be totally different, for one reason or another.
 
Stanley Road said:
Its illegal to drink drive, not open to interpretation
Click to expand...

Well yes...because that's a set law in place. Some legal disputes such as this are always going to be much more difficult to get universal agreement on, hence the 8-3 verdict.
 
Stanley Road said:
Its illegal to drink drive, not open to interpretation
Click to expand...

The overwhelming majority of laws aren't black and white. Most of them involve a degree of judgement. When the law says I have to take "reasonable care" of my employees safety in the workplace, it can't then list every possible hypothetical health and safety situation. It relies on people using their judgement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.