UK Politics Thread

britbox

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
27,512
Reactions
6,344
Points
113
Location
Gold Coast, Australia
This doesn't come from America Teddy. Brits pursued the case....

It's kind of irrelevant though I think... I can't see anyway that parliament would vote to remain in after the public voted out. Both of the major parties will vote out if it has to go through parliament.

Most of the wrangling is that parliamentarians want to see the detail. The problem is that if they are shown the detail too early then it puts a spanner in the works of the negotiations.

I did hear that one proposal was the UK may pay a multi-billion figure for unfettered access to the single EU market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: teddytennisfan

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
This doesn't come from America Teddy. Brits pursued the case....

It's kind of irrelevant though I think... I can't see anyway that parliament would vote to remain in after the public voted out. Both of the major parties will vote out if it has to go through parliament.

Most of the wrangling is that parliamentarians want to see the detail. The problem is that if they are shown the detail too early then it puts a spanner in the works of the negotiations.

I did hear that one proposal was the UK may pay a multi-billion figure for unfettered access to the single EU market.


you;'re being TOO KIND. britbox.

i maintain that all this -- they are consequences of britain leaders for decades now handing over REAL policies to the USA.

I AM simply saying -- it is TIME for the british -- however you arrange your relations between population and elite -- to BE independent, of the USA.

for you have not been.

and that ''pay EU to leave?"

what kind of NONSENSE is that? if there are ''arrears'' for ''past membership" fees. fine...just do it - one way or another..

but i am highly suspicious that it does NOT amount to THAT at all.
it's a TOLL to ''go through the exit door"

whoever heard of such a thing?

you go to a moviehouse -- you pay ticket -- watch the movie, youdon't like it -- you walk out and you are CHARGED to get out?


that's ROBBERY.

IN The 1990's After USSR dissolved --

Since one way or another the globe is interconnected even between vastly different political systems -- banking and all that, loans for business, investments, etc..

the USSR of course had ITS share of debt owed to foreign countries and banks...

RUSSIA singlehandedly took over the debt obligations of the NOW -- independent other countries --

ukraine, kyrgyzstan, kazakhstan, uzbekistan, mongolia, georgia, etc...paid all their debts to global creditors who of course would never agree to a 'haircut' --

and at the same time FORGAVE all the debts of these former USSR countries TO russia herself.

and then started fresh -- by 1999. which - mind you -- also forgave all the debts owed by african countries, cuba, vietnam, etc...

so -- i think -- since these CAN be 'written off" by sheer political will --

what is the problem with Britain telling EU -- about BREXIT -- to - borrow

american victoria nuland's phone conversation about EU --

'' FUCK EU ?"


the british people paid in TAXES for their participation ion EU..paying the EU ''commissioners; '' NICE lifestyles to pad their wallets and their corporate masters...

who the hell cares about THEM?
LOL.
 
Last edited:

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
CONSIDERING i am not even BRITISH...

why do i have a ''quarrel" about something that's really none of my business?

because at least the way i look at it -- anywhere --

it's just not right for a people of a time to be subjected to somethign that is just NOT FAIR to them because of what their leaders allow to happen in collusion with others .

BECAUSE -- strange as it may seem -- i dont want HIM doing to you europe what he has done to MY country philippines for a hundred years...a doormat conquered on the way to conquer yet another...

ion YOUR case -- doormat EUROPE -- including britain -- to enter RUSSIA ..

IN the case of the philippines -- "shall be ours forever -- and shall be our doorstep to all of asia which we shall conquer". as T ROOSEVELT boasted..

YOU THINK YOU ARE TO BE TREATED DIFFERENT?just because you LOOK the same --


WHITE? lol. you don't undertstand what THIS ''WHITE" ACROSS the atlantic from you is or has become .it learned ALL YOUR euroepan tricks on countries -- and NOW USES THEM ON YOU -- all of you.




WHO are the british ordinary citizens going to pay more taxes in order to ''pay back the arrears'' or ''divorce and separation" money? to EU?

it's just the institutions and banks in EU that are unelected -- and whose ''money" haul they WON'T even share with their populations -- (not that that is a reason for britain 'paying up')

but simply because this whole business of ''free trade area" in EU -- was a SCAM to begin with --

as a decades-long project to create a ''borderless" CORPORATE take-over by none other than the ''new nationality" of ALL of europe...

and that is -- the MORDOR across the potomac.

it is NOT even a TRUE ''free trade" zone -- but just a scheme to IMPOSE AN UNFAIR taxation UPON THE PEOPLES OF EUROPE

BY THE AMERICANS. after FIRST destroying the sovereignty of the european states and RESHAPE them all into ONE ''union"

under orders from the USA.

if you folks in britain and europe haven't YET seen that -- you need to wake up -- if you think it;s all about your 'domestic and national policies"


it's NOT --it's ablout AMERICAN policy masquerading as YOUR ''domestic and regional policies" ...

where your MASTER and POLICEMAN using ALL yhour state and social institutions - gradually ''reformed" -- is UNCLE SAM.

don't you realize that yet? it's all written around your walls in different languages......


UNCLE SAM OWNS YOU!! AS HIS WAY TO PASS ON TO YOUR SHOULDERS


the COST of keeping up uncle sam's EMPIRE.

lol.
 
Last edited:

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
rt.com
Bye-bye Brexit? Britain’s bid to rid itself of EU membership may fall flat
Martin Jay is a veteran foreign correspondent now based in Beirut who works on a freelance basis for a number of respected British newspapers as well as Deutsche Welle TV. Previously he has worked in Africa and Europe for CNN, Euronews, CNBC, BBC and Reuters. Follow him on Twitter @MartinRJay

A High Court ruling in London has delayed Theresa May from formerly starting Brexit, whcih is just one of many battles she will have to fight if she can start proceedings in March of next year in the Article 50 ‘rat trap’.

Britain’s High Court decision to overrule the country’s June 23rd referendum is starting to trouble Euroskeptics as they fear Theresa May, who was originally opposed to Britain leaving the EU, will at best soften her Brexit position, or at worse ultimately surrender to the elements in Brussels – if Britain ever gets to start the process to leave the EU, that is.

But it’s far too early to talk about soft or hard Brexit. Thursday’s ruling in London is one of many hurdles for the government to jump before May’s government ultimately goes hard or soft in Brussels sometime in 2019.

And there’s another important factor. The date. Eurocrats in Brussels are pushing for Britain to trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty so that a two-year timetable can begin, which I would argue is a trap for Britain; two years is hardly long enough to negotiate a trade deal with an organization which is notorious for taking decades to signing them off; or fails to complete them at all. If no deal is struck at the end of the two-year period, does that mean the UK has to accept whatever it is told by the likes of Jean-Claude Juncker, a man so positively bereft of a personality that accusations of him having a drink problem has added a layer of charisma to his otherwise gray exterior?

Read more


There is a race on for Brexit both on the legal side with the British High Courts and also with the EU who would ideally like to have ‘no deal’ at the end of the marathon so the UK does not make an example to other wobbly EU states (Denmark, Sweden, Czech Republic, Hungary and Spain) just a few weeks ahead of the EU’s own elections. Yes, the EU has elections. Well, it’s parliament with over 600 MEPs will go to the polls in 2019 battling fears from Junker, Schulz and Tusk that even lower voter turn outs might render the project as faintly useless as either a outdated trading block or a – don’t laugh – United States of Europe superpower, complete with a new army.

This reality is what Britain is up against with Brexit if it can get over its own legal challenge.

Surprisingly, there are less people in Britain from the ‘remain’ camp who want to go back to staying in the UK, due to a lot of the scaremongering – particularly about foreign companies pulling out of Britain - being false. Parliament too is sensing that to do a U-turn now might muster a political calamity in the country and give gusto to a good number of new seats being won by UKIP as confidence in the Tories wains and old Labour voters turn out in droves to protest against Jeremy Corbyn.

The Remain campaign has been in full swing on social media but Britain’s own left wing broadsheet which has a cabal of Remain commentators chose to take the ruling as a way of riling Leave campaigner Dan Hannan MEP that Brexit would invigorate cherished national parliaments with new power – suggesting that the Tory MEP’s logic was disingenuous as he doesn’t welcome Thursday’s ruling which does that very thing.

As Brexit gets dragged out until the middle of 2019 with no outcome, and the EU hurled Britain into legal darkness in terms of whether UK companies can send goods to the continent, Corbyn might win the election on a ‘scrap Brexit and keep Scotland’ ticket – if the Scots haven’t left Britain.

So much depends on back room negotiating with recalcitrant EU member states that have an axe to grind with the UK. France is one, which would dearly love to take the financial trading of the City of London and make Paris the equities epicenter of the world and is patently jealous of how much Foreign Direct Investment ‘Cool Britannia’ gets over its Gallic neighbor. And Spain is another. It’s hard to imagine Madrid would agree to any terms of a Brexit without Gibraltar being traded. Those on the Rock are hoping to have a special EU status as a member state, free from Spain and still remain part of the British Crown, but it’s unlikely that Spain will allow it.

And then there is the EU itself which has proved in recent months that it will not take any bullying from Merkel who has tried to argue that Britain needs a good Brexit so that German car workers can keep their jobs. The same argument could be championed by the French who stand to lose a lot if French wine no longer makes it to the British, who, per head are the greatest consumers of French champagne by far. Yet it seems from the petulant snorting in Brussels of Junker he would rather compensate those workers in both those countries with EU cash hand outs, and keep up appearances that the EU is not a vessel taking in water, despite its own Brexit chief negotiator Guy Verhofstadt actually coining the phrase that the British were “rats leaving a sinking ship.”

The problem is that it is France and Germany who normally keep Brussels hounds from barking too loud and upsetting the neighbors, but leaders of these countries are almost certain to lose Presidential elections next year. Critically, until then, Juncker will play the joker and conjure up an illusion that the EU is well and viable as it is unlikely that even one of the 1,200 or so journalists in Brussels will say otherwise through fear of being marginalized from the press handout trough.

The reality is that the EU is going to face its own gargantuan crisis at the polls in 2019, and some fear that low turn outs will spark a Spexit, Dexit, Grexit. In my view, the EU will have to quickly reform itself into a streamlined operation with less powers if any EU member state opts for a referendum; the EU will implode entirely if one eurozone country even opts for a referendum and so all eyes are on Greece and Spain making the latter as powerful in the EU and Germany and France.

And so the race is on to not only finish before two years, but also finish with a deal with both EU mandarins but also governments who have an agenda with Britain.

For the time being, the EU’s hopes have been lifted by the British High Court decision, which will be challenged before December 7th by Theresa May, who will have to change the laws which govern such decisions in parliament if she loses, or ultimately put it to MEPs to vote on Brexit.

Euroskeptic icon, Nigel Farage warns of “public anger” surmounting what he calls a “betrayal” if she flounders which would certainly see a few UKIP MEPs enter the UK’s parliament in 2019 which is an outcome May would also want to avoid – and so there is a great deal of pressure on her, to stick to her plan to trigger the article in March of next year. If Britain is to finally fail in its efforts to leave the EU “sinking ship” it is more likely to be due to the dirty tricks of the EU elite in Brussels more than the British public or the foibles of May’s negotiators.

@MartinRJay

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
 

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
my question to you -- the BRITISH here...

what do you think of the ''warnings" about BREXIT causing 'loss of foreign investors and business exiting?"

i am asking that because it is the same ''warning" about my home country philippines after the new president duterte talked abotu wanting to ''EXIT" ''dog-on-a-leash" servitude to the USA And simply

go for a more independent foreign policy focused on expanding business and trade and infrastructure relations with countries outside of the ''american-authorized" ones... *(i know this as a matter of course) -

it is TRUE that since his election in june and he voiced his ''loosening dependence on washington" -- FOREIGN INVESTMENTS had dropped...

but generally NOT mentioned is that they are after all - AMERICAN and western investments -- rather than ASIAN investments and certainly NOT chinese investments (in fact they INCREASED - AND NOW are looking at high-speed rail, transport, agriculture, construction , technology and other projects - same as , presumably russia )...

in application to BREXIT -- SUCH WARNINGS of 'loss of trade and investment if you go against the approved global and regional order" --

how are any of YOU assessing these?

do you think they are CORRECT , already true, and if so, ''worth the price" of brexit -- and that -- britain and her population, businesses, particularly the homegrown businesses NOT find alternatives...such as............oh -- asia? IF the european based businesses and investors ''pull out due to brexit?"

because after all -- let us remember -- NATURE ABHORS A VACUUM.
 

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
RT has it's UK bank accounts closed by NatWest... part of the Royal Bank of Scotland.

https://www.rt.com/uk/363068-galloway-rt-nat-west/

I THINK whoever is ordering that done -- they're just ''cutting their own noses to spite someone".

u know the old saying.


they can kick out every russian diplomat even , if they want...

in the end - its just going to bite back at britain.

the russians have this very uncanny way about them -- and i have known PLENTY of them all my adult life -- b

since my university music days under my russian teacher long ago (a ''refugee'' from the end of the imperial russia days escaping the bolshevik revolution -- passed through china, then found her life in the philippines as a famous concert pianist decades ago in her time)

and in the USA -- and recently in st petersburg russia itself...

that is DECADES of knowing them one way or another..

and i CAN say one thing about them...summed up by PUTIN recently.

"sanctions -- we did not start this -- we will respond appropriately, but always open to discussion on an equal basis...

"however -- if the west under the orders of certain of our partners insist on not doing business with us -- we are not going to force ourselves on them...it is not that complicated...we will find a way to do what we have to do for our country and with other partners".

a SHRUG is all it really gets.

sort of

"you want something? let us talk.''
"you don't want ? ok -- bye i have other things to do".
 

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
original.antiwar.com
How Washington Turned Ireland Into an International Scofflaw - Antiwar.com Original
Conn Hallinan
“We declare the right of the people of Ireland to the ownership of Ireland, and to the unfettered control of Irish destinies, to be sovereign and indefeasible.” So declared the Irish partisans of the Easter Rising against British rule 100 years ago.

Controlling their own destiny has always been a bit of a preoccupation for the Irish, in large part because for 735 years someone else was in charge. From the Norman invasion in 1169 to the establishment of the Free State in 1922, Ireland’s political and economic life was not its own to determine. Its young men were shipped off to fight England’s colonial battles half a world away, at Isandlwana, Dum Dum, Omdurman, and Kut. Almost 50,000 died in World War I, choking on gas at Ypres, clinging desperately to a beachhead at Gallipoli, or marching into German machine guns at the Somme.

When the Irish finally cast off their colonial yoke, they pledged never again to be cannon fodder in other nation’s wars, a pledge that has now been undermined by the United States. Once again, a powerful nation – with the acquiescence of the Dublin government – has put the Irish in harm’s way.

A Forward Operating Base for Washington

The flashpoint for this is Shannon Airport, located in County Clare on Ireland’s west coast. Since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on Washington and New York, some 2.5 million US troops have passed through the airport on their way to Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. The Shannon hub has become so important to Washington that it hosts a permanent US staff officer to direct traffic. It is, in the words of the peace organization Shannonwatch, “a US forward operating base.”

The airport has also been tied to dozens of CIA “rendition” flights, where prisoners seized in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan were shipped to various “black sites” in Europe, Asia, and Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

Irish peace activists and members of the Irish parliament, or Oireachtas Eireann, charge that an agreement between the Irish government and Washington to allow the transiting of troops and aircraft through Shannon not only violates Irish neutrality, it violates international law.

“The logistical support for the US military and CIA at Shannon is a contravention of Ireland’s neutrality,” says John Lannon of the peace group Shannonwatch, and has “contributed to death, torture, starvation, forced displacement, and a range of other human rights abuses.”

Ireland is not a member of NATO, and it is considered officially neutral. But “neutral” in Ireland can be a slippery term. The government claims that Ireland is “militarily neutral” – it doesn’t belong to any military alliances – but not “politically neutral.”

But the term militarily neutral “does not exist in international law,” says Karen Devine, an expert on neutrality at the Dublin City University’s School of Law and Government. “The decision to aid belligerents in war is…incompatible with Article 2 of the Fifth Hague Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons in Case of War on Land.” Devine argues that “the Irish government’s decision to permit the transit of hundreds of thousands of US soldiers through Shannon Airport on their way to the Iraq War in 2003 violated international law on neutrality and set it apart from European neutrals who refused such permission.”

Article 2 of the Convention states, “Belligerents are forbidden to move troops or convoys of either munitions or war supplies across the territory of a neutral power.”

Ireland has not ratified the Hague Convention. But according to British international law expert Iain Scobbie, the country is still bound by it because Article 29 of the Irish Constitution states, “Ireland accepts the generally recognized principle of international law as its rule of conduct in relations with other states.”

The UN Security Council did not endorse the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq, making both conflicts technically illegal. Then-UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan said that the invasions “were not in conformity with the UN Charter. From our point of view, from the Charter’s point of view,” the invasions were “illegal.”

An Outlaw Outpost

Shannonwatch’s Lannon says the agreement also violates the 1952 Air Navigation Foreign Military Aircraft Order that “aircraft must be unarmed, carry no arms, ammunition, and explosives, and must not engage in intelligence gathering and that the flights in question must not form part of a military exercises or operations.”

The Dublin government claims that all US aircraft adhere to the 1952 order, although it refuses to inspect aircraft or allow any independent inspection. According to retired Irish Army Captain Tom Clonan, the Irish Times security analyst, the soldiers are armed but leave their weapons on board the transports – generally Hercules C-130s – while they stretch their legs after the long cross Atlantic flight. Airport employees have also seen soldiers with their weapons.

The Irish government also says that it has been assured that no rendition flights have flown through Shannon, but Shannonwatch activists have tracked flights in and out of the airport. As for “assurances,” Washington “assured” the British government that no rendition flights used British airports, but in 2008 then-Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband told Parliament that such flights did use the United Kingdom-controlled island of Diego Garcia.

Investigative journalist’s Mark Danner’s book Spiral chronicles the grotesque nature of some of the “enhanced interrogation” techniques inflicted on those prisoners. The rendition program violated the 1987 UN Convention Against Torture, which Ireland is a party to.

Roslyn Fuller, Dublin-based scholar and author of Beasts and Gods: How Democracy Changed Its Meaning and Lost Its Purpose, says terror suspects were taken to sites where “in an appalling rerun of the Spanish Inquisition tactics,” they were “routinely tortured and mistreated in an attempt to obtain confessions and other information.”

Fuller points out that Article 11 of the Hague Convention requires that troops belonging to a “belligerent” army must be interned. “In other words, any country that would like to call itself neutral is obligated to prevent warring parties from moving troops though its territory and to gently scoop up anyone attempting to contravene this principle.”

The Bitter Fruits of Blowback

Besides violating international law, Ireland is harvesting “the bitter fruits of the Iraq and Afghan wars” and NATO’s military intervention in Libya, charges MP Richard Boyd Barrett of the People Before Profit Party and chair of the Irish Anti-War Movement. “The grotesque images of children and families washed up on Europe’s shores, desperate refugees, risking and losing their lives,” he says, “are the direct result of disastrous wars waged by the US, the U.K., and other major western powers over the last 12 years.”

The Irish government, says Barrett, has “colluded with war crimes and actions for which we are now witnessing the most terrible consequences.”

The government has waived all traffic control costs on military flights, costing Dublin about $45 million from 2003 to 2015. Ireland is currently running one of the highest per capita debts in Europe and has applied austerity measures that have reduced pensions and severely cut social services, health programs, and education. Other neutral European countries like Finland, Austria, and Switzerland charge the US military fees for using their airspace.

Shannon might also make Ireland collateral damage in the war on terror, according to the Irish Times’ Clonan. Irish citizens are now seen as a “hostile party,” and British Islamist cleric Anjem Choudary has named Shannon a “legitimate target,” according to Irish journalist Danielle Ryan.

The Dublin government has generally avoided open discussion of the issue, and when it comes up, ministers tend to get evasive. In response to the charge that Shannon hosted rendition flights, then-Minister of Foreign Affairs Dermot Ahern said, “If anyone has evidence of any of these flights please give me a call and I will have it investigated.” But even though Amnesty International produced flights logs for 50 rendition landings at Shannon, the government did nothing. Investigations by the Council on Europe and European Parliament also confirmed rendition flights through Shannon.

Peace activists charge that attempts to raise the issue in the Irish parliament have met with a combination of stonewalling and half-truths. Apparently kissing the Blarney Stone is not just for tourists.

The government’s position finds little support among the electorate. Depending on how the questions are asked, polls indicate that between 55 and 58 percent of the Irish oppose allowing US transports to land at Shannon, and between 57 and 76 percent want to add a neutrality clause to the constitution.

The “forward base” status of Shannon also puts the west of Ireland in the crosshairs in the event of a war with Russia. While that might seem far-fetched, in 2015 NATO held 14 military maneuvers directed at Russia, and relations between NATO, the United States, and Moscow are at their lowest point since the height of the Cold War.

Of course, Ireland is not alone in putting itself in harm’s way. The US has more than 800 bases worldwide, bases that might well be targeted in a nuclear war with China or Russia. Local populations have little say over the construction of these bases, but they would be the first casualties in a conflict.

Pit Stop of Death

For centuries Ireland was colonialism’s laboratory. The policies the British used to enchain Ireland’s people – religious division and ethnic hatred – were tested out in the Emerald Isle and then shipped off to India, Kenya, South Africa, Nigeria, and Guyana. Irish soldiers populate colonial graveyards on all four continents. And now, once again, Ireland has been drawn into a conflict that is has no stake in.

Not that the Irish have taken this lying down. Scores of activists have invaded Shannon to block military flights and, on occasion, to attack aircraft with axes and hammers. “Pit stop of death” was one slogan peace demonstrators painted on a hangar at the airport.

That resistance harkens back to the 1916 Easter Rebellion’s proclamation that ends with the words that ring as true today as they did a century ago: “In this supreme hour the Irish nation must, by its valor and discipline and by the readiness of its children to sacrifice themselves for the common good, prove itself worthy of the august destiny to which it is called.”

Foreign Policy In Focus columnist Conn Hallinan can be read at www.dispatchesfromtheedgeblog.wordpress.com and www.middleempireseries.wordpress.com. Reprinted with permission from Foreign Policy In Focus.

Read more by Conn Hallinan
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,664
Reactions
5,742
Points
113
The only Brexit pledge was to leave the EU as a member. Anything else said can only be classed as an aspiration of the person who said it.

That's hilarious! I'm sure you're just pretending to be naive. Campaigners say what they will these days and no one seems to be called up on it until after the fact. Sadly an uniformed electorate will consume a lot of this stuff. It's not just Western democracy that's imperilled, it's journalism
 

britbox

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
27,512
Reactions
6,344
Points
113
Location
Gold Coast, Australia
That's hilarious! I'm sure you're just pretending to be naive. Campaigners say what they will these days and no one seems to be called up on it until after the fact. Sadly an uniformed electorate will consume a lot of this stuff. It's not just Western democracy that's imperilled, it's journalism

How can any cross-party aspiration be considered to be a pledge? None of the Brexit groups were in power. UKIP can't make pledges as they don't have any parliamentary power, the tory rump couldn't make pledges as their own party were banking on remain and as for Labour... the smallish group of parliamentarians supporting Brexit have zero say in proceedings anyway. Nobody in the Leave camp had any mandate whatsoever to make any sort of pledge... only aspirations. How could you possibly interpret it otherwise, unless using your own words, you were completely naive? Even the Leave campaigning was split into different groups... there was no manifesto and therefore no pledge... other than Leave the EU!
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,664
Reactions
5,742
Points
113
How can any cross-party aspiration be considered to be a pledge? None of the Brexit groups were in power. UKIP can't make pledges as they don't have any parliamentary power, the tory rump couldn't make pledges as their own party were banking on remain and as for Labour... the smallish group of parliamentarians supporting Brexit have zero say in proceedings anyway. Nobody in the Leave camp had any mandate whatsoever to make any sort of pledge... only aspirations. How could you possibly interpret it otherwise, unless using your own words, you were completely naive? Even the Leave campaigning was split into different groups... there was no manifesto and therefore no pledge... other than Leave the EU!

First of all, we're not talking about aspirations even if that's how you want to try to characterise it. We're talking about what campaigners claimed would happen if Brexit occurred. We are not talking about what I believed (I think we both know what I thought!), we're talking about the arguments that were used to sway the electorate. It doesn't really matter what mandate campaigners had, what matters is what they were able to get people to believe. This is why truth matters, and I'm surprised you're not simply laughing and admitting they did what they did. After all, it won them the referendum. Ends justify the means and all that..
 

britbox

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
27,512
Reactions
6,344
Points
113
Location
Gold Coast, Australia
Well, first of all... you're pissing in the wind.... because Brexit hasn't occurred yet, so the ramifications won't be known for some time yet... or even the details of the deal that is eventually struck.

What we do know is that Cameron didn't invoke Article 50 like he said he would do with immediate effect... we know there was no emergency budget like Osbourne claimed would happen and we know that businesses aren't leaviing in droves like they claimed (i.e. Nissan et al).... so all we know for sure right now, is that some of the claims made by the remain group were utter crap.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
mrzz World Affairs 2466
T World Affairs 13
britbox World Affairs 88
britbox World Affairs 9044
britbox World Affairs 46