helen

Fools, Rules and Brexitation.

1,462 posts in this topic

What are rules for except ‘ the adherence of fools’?

Lawyers acting for several whistleblowers have argued there is a case to prosecute the main pro Brexit campaign Vote Leave which, they allege, used a smaller pro-Brexit youth group – BeLeave –  to get around the £7million spending limit by making a £625,000 donation to BeLeave before the 2016 EU referendum.
In a 50 page submission to the House of Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee they argue this money should have been declared as part of Vote Leave’s expenditure and have come forward with new allegations about how closely the two campaigns were linked.
Lawyers for another whistleblower confirm that he was paid by Vote Leave to do web design and communications services for both campaign groups.

Legal opinion submitted to the culture committee’s inquiry into fake news said:
“We consider that there is a prima facie case that ... electoral offences were committed by Vote Leave in the EU referendum campaign and that these require urgent investigation so that consideration can be given to whether to refer the case to the Crown Prosecution Service for a decision on whether to prosecute.”

Just a bit of sour-grapiness from the ever whinging remoaners? Or does it put the veracity of the referendum itself in doubt?

Ministers B Johnson and M Gove have both spoken out in defence of Vote Leave.  Mr Johnson described the claims as “utterly ludicrous”, Vote Leave “won fair and square – and legally”.

After all, freeing us from nit-picking bureaucracy is what the Brexit is all about.

 

Edited by helen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, helen said:

Just a bit of sour-grapiness from the ever whinging remoaners?

Hmm...........I think that's about spot on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, as is well known in this forum I voted to remain and to me it is ludicrous that you should want the same faetures of a club, even though you are leaving said club!   

 

That having been said, if we can get free trade with India, China, US, Australia and New Zealand to name a few countries as well as having free trade with the EU, then hey great it is worth going through Brexit.     However, from details I have seen it looks like we will be not better off than we are now with only have free trade with the EU, as none of the Commonwealth Countries, US or China it seems want to have free trade with the UK!!  

 

Boris Johnson is known as a racist, manipulating sod and should not be in the position of Foreign Secretary and of course on that basis everything that he says is believeable......NOT!!

 

If the rules where broken, then I think that it is best for the High Court to decide that matter and if they feel that laws were broken, then it does bring into question the result.  However, I would suspect that back in 2016 it would still be in favour of leaving the EU.   Now, because of the clumsy way the EU negotiations have been done, if there was a vote it is more likely to be that we stay in the EU.   This is due to the fact that the majority that voted that we should leave the EU are 70 and over, but it is very unlikely that they will get to see us leaving the EU.  So have just screwed the countries future generations out of having any good deals with the rest of Europe and the trading markets of the world.            

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Robbies said:

Boris Johnson is known as a racist, manipulating sod and should not be in the position of Foreign Secretary and of course on that basis everything that he says is believeable......NOT!!

I just love it how liberals can throw the word 'racist' around will no thought as to it's meaning. Ergo, you are neutering the meaning of the word.

The word 'sod', rather ambiguous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rowlf said:

I just love it how liberals can throw the word 'racist' around will no thought as to it's meaning. Ergo, you are neutering the meaning of the word.

The word 'sod', rather ambiguous.

Iy has been shown many times over in some comments that he has made that he is racist.

 

Here are just a coup,e of links that can be found when doing google search pm Boris Johnson racist:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/36793900/boris-johnsons-most-controversial-foreign-insults

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/28/boris-johnson-urged-to-apologise-for-attending-racist-campaign-launch

 

There is many, many more that can be found from doing that search.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Robbies said:

Iy has been shown many times over in some comments that he has made that he is racist.

 

Here are just a coup,e of links that can be found when doing google search pm Boris Johnson racist:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/36793900/boris-johnsons-most-controversial-foreign-insults

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/28/boris-johnson-urged-to-apologise-for-attending-racist-campaign-launch

 

There is many, many more that can be found from doing that search.    

'Boris Johnson has been urged to apologise after it emerged that he attended the launch of local Tory campaign that has been accused of “dog-whistle racism”.'

My first thought is that you can't label someone as racist, if they have been accused of fraternizing  with someone accused of being a racist.

I will reiterate that you need to read, as well as write, your sentences accurately. I stopped at the first lame excuse for suggesting this man was a racist, and I imagine that further investigation of your links would only be a waste of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, rowlf said:

'Boris Johnson has been urged to apologise after it emerged that he attended the launch of local Tory campaign that has been accused of “dog-whistle racism”.'

My first thought is that you can't label someone as racist, if they have been accused of fraternizing  with someone accused of being a racist.

I will reiterate that you need to read, as well as write, your sentences accurately. I stopped at the first lame excuse for suggesting this man was a racist, and I imagine that further investigation of your links would only be a waste of time.

Whether you think that following up the links I have provided is a waste of time, I am not really bothered to be honest.  But neither Boris Johnson or Michael Gove are the best examples of Tory politicians, yet they hold positions in the cabinet.  That is like giving a child keys to drive a family car on public roads.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Robbies said:

Whether you think that following up the links I have provided is a waste of time, I am not really bothered to be honest.  But neither Boris Johnson or Michael Gove are the best examples of Tory politicians, yet they hold positions in the cabinet.  That is like giving a child keys to drive a family car on public roads.    

What you're now saying is a helluva lot different than calling a man a racist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, rowlf said:

What you're now saying is a helluva lot different than calling a man a racist.

But he is a racist, hence why  he is not the best example to have in the cabinet of a government of the Tory party.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Robbies said:

But he is a racist, hence why  he is not the best example to have in the cabinet of a government of the Tory party.   

How do you know he's a racist?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Boris was Mayor of London, he wanted to bring in a rule that all coloured people whose families where from West Indies, Africa or India should be banned from going out at night on Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights, just because statistics showed that the men from those groups are most likely to commit a crime on the three days mentioned, than any white person.  The ruling got thrown out of the London Assembly fortunately.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Robbies said:

When Boris was Mayor of London, he wanted to bring in a rule that all coloured people whose families where from West Indies, Africa or India should be banned from going out at night on Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights, just because statistics showed that the men from those groups are most likely to commit a crime on the three days mentioned, than any white person.  The ruling got thrown out of the London Assembly fortunately.    

I googled it, but couldn't find anything to substantiate your post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Robbies said:

But he is a racist, hence why  he is not the best example to have in the cabinet of a government of the Tory party.   

How can he be racist when he has got an Indian wife? Have you got an Indian wife?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/04/2018 at 7:24 PM, helen said:

What are rules for except ‘ the adherence of fools’?

Lawyers acting for several whistleblowers have argued there is a case to prosecute the main pro Brexit campaign Vote Leave which, they allege, used a smaller pro-Brexit youth group – BeLeave –  to get around the £7million spending limit by making a £625,000 donation to BeLeave before the 2016 EU referendum.
In a 50 page submission to the House of Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee they argue this money should have been declared as part of Vote Leave’s expenditure and have come forward with new allegations about how closely the two campaigns were linked.
Lawyers for another whistleblower confirm that he was paid by Vote Leave to do web design and communications services for both campaign groups.

Legal opinion submitted to the culture committee’s inquiry into fake news said:
“We consider that there is a prima facie case that ... electoral offences were committed by Vote Leave in the EU referendum campaign and that these require urgent investigation so that consideration can be given to whether to refer the case to the Crown Prosecution Service for a decision on whether to prosecute.”

Just a bit of sour-grapiness from the ever whinging remoaners? Or does it put the veracity of the referendum itself in doubt?

Ministers B Johnson and M Gove have both spoken out in defence of Vote Leave.  Mr Johnson described the claims as “utterly ludicrous”, Vote Leave “won fair and square – and legally”.

After all, freeing us from nit-picking bureaucracy is what the Brexit is all about.

 

You are correct, it is Just more sour grapes from sore losers. David Cameron was the UK Prime Minister at the time of the referendum, who campaigned for the UK to stay in the EU. The UK Government of the day were effectively supporting the Remain campaign which was a massive advantage for the Remain campaign which money could not buy. How much did it cost to fly President Barack Obama and his  entourage into London to lie to UK voters by telling them the UK would be at the back of the queue for trade negotiations with America if the UK voted to leave the EU? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Augustus said:

How can he be racist when he has got an Indian wife? Have you got an Indian wife?

No, but I have many friends whose families originally came from India, West indies and Africa.  Plus I was within the London Assembly at the time the ruling was thrown out, as I was a guest of one of the London Assembly members whose family came from India.    

 

Just because someone has got a wife that is from an ethnic origin, does not mean to say that he is not a racist.  There has been many people found to be racist, who have wife's from the ethnic people that they are being racist against in history.    

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember, Mrs Farage is a German.  It's appalling.  All these foreigners coming over here and marrying our racists ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Alteredbhoy said:

Remember, Mrs Farage is a German.  It's appalling.  All these foreigners coming over here and marrying our racists ...

Damned right! There should be laws against it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rowlf, the term racist, is usually  casually threw around by lefties, to discourage genuine concerns by the population, regarding the amount of non British people invading our country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not just coming but abusing the system,  and as regards brexit well, it's already a done deal, we are out of it next year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More questions are due to be asked by a select committee in parliament this week about alleged undeclared spending and misuse of data by Leave.EU (the Ukip campaign group headed by N Farage).
My point is. If the Remain campaign had won the referendum but had been found to have broken the law in the process, would anyone have cared? I can only presume the heartbroken brexiteers would have accepted the cheating gracefully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, helen said:

More questions are due to be asked by a select committee in parliament this week about alleged undeclared spending and misuse of data by Leave.EU (the Ukip campaign group headed by N Farage).
My point is. If the Remain campaign had won the referendum but had been found to have broken the law in the process, would anyone have cared? I can only presume the heartbroken brexiteers would have accepted the cheating gracefully.

If only a frog had wings......................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The House of Commons select committee looking into the subject of fake news as been at work today.

The committee heard that , Andy Wigmore, who ran the Ukip, Leave.EU campaign, spoke to a researcher at Essex University, he admitted it “completely, completely, completely” copied Donald Trump’s tactic of making “outrageous” statements. He said:
“The only way we were going to make a noise was to follow the Trump doctrine, which was, the more outrageous we are, the more attention we'll get, and the more attention we get, the more outrageous we'll be. And that's exactly what we did.”
"The propaganda machine of the Nazis, for instance …  In its pure marketing sense, you can see the logic of what they were saying, why they were saying it, and how they presented things, and the imagery.”

Nigel Oakes, chief executive of the parent company of Cambridge Analytica told the same researcher, Trump portrayed Muslims as “an artificial enemy", in the same way that Adolf Hitler played on German hatred for Jews.
"Hitler attacked the Jews…  the people didn't like the Jews and so he just leveraged an artificial enemy... that's exactly what Trump did. He leveraged Muslims,"

None of this will come as a surprise to anyone with functioning ears and half a brain. Politicians sometimes talk about the ‘sophistication’ of the modern electorate, perhaps they are just being patronising. The surprising thing is that we are still gullible enough to be taken in by such obvious Nazi tactics.
Welcome to the amoral, brave new world of fake news, where facts are meaningless and everything is deniable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/04/2018 at 11:25 AM, helen said:

More questions are due to be asked by a select committee in parliament this week about alleged undeclared spending and misuse of data by Leave.EU (the Ukip campaign group headed by N Farage).
My point is. If the Remain campaign had won the referendum but had been found to have broken the law in the process, would anyone have cared? I can only presume the heartbroken brexiteers would have accepted the cheating gracefully.

I don't think anyone would have cared because nothing would have changed or would be changing. The main problem is the majority of MPs don't want the UK to leave the EU and too many of them don't respect the decision made by the  democratic UK people. The referendum result was a big surprise which would not have been the case if the Remain campaign had won the referendum. Another problem is the whole Brexit process is a long drawn out process which isn't the same as when there is a change of Government in the UK. The length of time before Brexit happens has given the sore losers too much time to cause trouble such as nitpicking over alleged undeclared spending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So! Their Lordships have voted by a 91 majority for an amendment to the EU withdrawal bill guaranteeing MPs a vote on the final Brexit deal.
Who do they think they are? This unelected revising chamber, defying the express will of the people on, of all days, May Day and…    well….    revising.
The leader of the Liberal Democrats in the Lords, Dick Newby, said the amendment “puts parliament in the driving seat”. Lord Douglas Hogg told peers the clause was “designed to ensure that the future of our country is determined by parliament and not by ministers”. A dangerous attempt at a power grab if ever I saw one!
And all this when I am just back from parading my tanks down the High Street to celebrate the dictatorship of the proletariat.
I should have taken more tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This seems an completely unbelievable.

1. 23 months after the referendum,

2. 14 months after the fools triggered Article 50,

3. 9 months after options were  first proposed in a government position paper.

The Cabinet is still trying to agree its negotiating position on the UK’s post-Brexit customs relationship with the EU.

What an embarrassment.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Welcome poverty! Welcome misery, welcome houselessness, welcome hunger, rags, tempest, and beggary! Mutual confidence will sustain us to the end!”

“Something will turn up!”

Wilkins Micawber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 02/05/2018 at 4:58 PM, explorer1954 said:

This seems an completely unbelievable.

1. 23 months after the referendum,

2. 14 months after the fools triggered Article 50,

3. 9 months after options were  first proposed in a government position paper.

The Cabinet is still trying to agree its negotiating position on the UK’s post-Brexit customs relationship with the EU.

What an embarrassment.....

The UK Government cabinet need a problem solver, who shares the same thinking process as Mr V.Putin. If the UK were to annex Ireland, then Ireland would no longer be in the EU and troublemakers wouldn't be able use the Custom Union as an excuse to try to prevent the UK completely leaving the EU. What's the point  in being a nuclear power and having a veto at the United Nations, if you don't take liberties now and again for your own national interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎04‎/‎05‎/‎2018 at 1:04 PM, Augustus said:

The UK Government cabinet need a problem solver, who shares the same thinking process as Mr V.Putin. If the UK were to annex Ireland, then Ireland would no longer be in the EU and troublemakers wouldn't be able use the Custom Union as an excuse to try to prevent the UK completely leaving the EU. What's the point  in being a nuclear power and having a veto at the United Nations, if you don't take liberties now and again for your own national interest.

So when you said that David Cameron was scaremongering, when he said that Brexit would lead to war, you now believe that he was right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Alteredbhoy said:

So when you said that David Cameron was scaremongering, when he said that Brexit would lead to war, you now believe that he was right?

No, he was scaremongering. My point is the UK are a powerful country and should behave in a more forceful manner towards the EU. At the end of the day there would be no EU, if the UK had not declared War on Germany in 1939. (see map below)
 

Edited by Augustus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Alteredbhoy said:

So when you said that David Cameron was scaremongering, when he said that Brexit would lead to war, you now believe that he was right?

Cameron may have been right, war is not such a absurd idea as it might seem. I don’t envisage Britain going to war with France any time soon but there are forces of small-minded nationalism on the rise around Europe, fed by the pressure of migration which provides a convenient scapegoat that can only grow as climate change takes hold in Africa. It is not too hard to imagine conflicts breaking out.
How long did it take for Yugoslavia to descend into war after the death of Tito?

Here we have the European Research Group, that secretive band of intransigent, neo-liberal carpet-baggers, led by Jacob Rees-Mogg. Pro American, anti European and who seem intent on grabbing power for themselves after Brexit (or before) and who think the European Union can be made to do as they are told.

If, as seems likely, the short term future turns out to be hard for the UK, both sides of the argument will be looking for someone to blame. The remain side will blame the Brexit side,  the Brexit side will blame Europe.

The EU has a strong interest in making an example of the UK, ‘to encourage the others’.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Augustus said:

No, he was scaremongering. My point is the UK are a powerful country and should behave in a more forceful manner towards the EU. At the end of the day there would be no EU, if the UK had not declared War on Germany in 1939. (see map below)
 

I'm not so sure that the critical factor in the founding of the EU was the UK declaring war on Germany in 1939.  More relevant acts that lead to the founding of the EU could be Japan's attack on Pearl Harbour or Germany's attack on the Soviet Union, which combined made the defeat of Nazi Germany much more certain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Alteredbhoy said:

I'm not so sure that the critical factor in the founding of the EU was the UK declaring war on Germany in 1939.  More relevant acts that lead to the founding of the EU could be Japan's attack on Pearl Harbour or Germany's attack on the Soviet Union, which combined made the defeat of Nazi Germany much more certain.

If the UK hadn't declared war on Germany in 1939, then Japan wouldn't have allied with Germany in 1940. If Japan hadn't allied with Germany, then Germany wouldn't have declared war on America, after America declared war on Japan, after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941. Japan were a bad ally for Germany because they didn't help them attack Russia, which would have been more helpful for Germany than attacking Pearl Harbor. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More Brexit and government stupidity.

1 Boris Johnson declares Customs partnership, he endorsed last August, as crazy 
2 Liam Fox axes international trade promotion civil servants jobs in pursuit of global Britain
3 Boris goes on Fox News to argue UK policy on Iran as Whitehouse won’t meet him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/05/2018 at 8:29 AM, explorer1954 said:

More Brexit and government stupidity.

1 Boris Johnson declares Customs partnership, he endorsed last August, as crazy 
2 Liam Fox axes international trade promotion civil servants jobs in pursuit of global Britain
3 Boris goes on Fox News to argue UK policy on Iran as Whitehouse won’t meet him

I guess there is more devil in the detail of a proposed customs partnership than there was last year.  Boris Johnson didn't look stupid on television and made a good case for President Trump not pulling the plug of the Iran deal. The people who looked stupid were the Iranian lawmakers, who burnt the American flag. Hopefully those traitorous British MPs and Lords, who have no respect for democracy won't start burning the Union Jack in the British parliament.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/9/2018 at 8:29 AM, explorer1954 said:

More Brexit and government stupidity.

1 Boris Johnson declares Customs partnership, he endorsed last August, as crazy 
2 Liam Fox axes international trade promotion civil servants jobs in pursuit of global Britain
3 Boris goes on Fox News to argue UK policy on Iran as Whitehouse won’t meet him

B. Johnson was played for a fool, so it appears was Macron. Trump must have had his instructions from Netanyahu days ago. We have seen the results overnight.
It is now up to the EU to show that they will not have their policy towards Iran dictated from Tel Aviv.
The UK is now too small to matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Vote Leave found to have breached multiple counts of law by Electoral Commission and referred to Metropolitan Police for investigation. What now for the Referendum result?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PM forms 2 mini-groups in cabinet to study her “customs partnership” model, and the bexiters' “maximum facilitation” proposal.

A dead heat is expected [or maybe a 52:48 split vote]

The Irony of Government 🙃 and yet the Article 50 clock continues to tick.

You would have thought they would know what they wanted by now, although it seems rather stupid as both of these options have been ruled out by the EU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't it odd that we have in the UK rules about how elections and referenda are meant to be conducted, and the Electoral Commission has referred that Chief Executive of Leave.UK to the police for breaking the rules, but we are told this is all political and makes no difference?

If it made no difference why did Aron Banks agree to spend tens of thousands pounds on it?

Share this post


Link to post
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