O/T:- Who needs Parliament?

[Elite_Pie]

Most certainly I would if convicted of telling lies as the law must be upheld although I believe the relevent question is "did he mislead the Queen" in his motives to ask for the closure of parliament, not that he lied to her. Whatever the forthcoming ruling is I would abide with it and if the word "Lie" is part of that ruling I would support you. "Bottling it" you say concerning the Supreme Court's ruling is not how I would word it. For the life of me I cannot see Boris deliberately telling porkies to the Queen whatever his future motives may be. Simply he used a legal loophole to bide more time regarding the EU fracas as well as legitimately proroguing. Frankly If he just asked her Majesty's permission to prorogue Parliament and she grants it, then for the life of me I can't see the point of bringing up all this media hysteria about him telling lies. Remember this as well EP. There is nobody more experienced than our Queen in sticking up for Britain ......... she lived through it as I detailed in my recent post. We will wait and see.

Right, so lying to our much-loved monarch is out of order, but misleading her is ok! Thanks for the reply anyway.

[seriouspie]

Right, so lying to our much-loved monarch is out of order, but misleading her is ok! Thanks for the reply anyway.

Jesus wept man ...... you have a knack of twisting words. Just read Bridpie's post which makes sound common sense, much better than mine I'll concede. I'll repeat that if the Court rule Boris lied OR misled the Queen regarding proroguing, I'll support your comments. Fair enough? ,,,, and will you accept that if he did nothing unlawful in the Court's view and proroguing was legal, would you accept that and pipe down for once, otherwise your arguments are getting childlike ...... keep smiling we'll soon be out, accept being a loser with good grace.

[ncfcog]

keep smiling we'll soon be out, accept being a loser with good grace.

But when we are out he’ll be a winner, like the rest of us.

[bridpie78]

But when we are out he’ll be a winner, like the rest of us.

It would be nice if that were the case, unfortunately what this whole referendum has highlighted most of all is that we are a divided country of whingers, the stereotypes of the Brits complaining about the weather or the wrong tea didn't come from nowhere.
I suspect that no matter what happens post Brexit, every up will be a temporary blip and every down will be because we left Europe and there will be this rose tinted spectacles version of how the last 4 decades were for this country.

I wonder...

Just how great has life been since we have been in the EU?
How many Billions have we pumped into the system and how much has it benefitted us in return?
How many UK industries have died or are on their last legs?
How many recessions have we gone through?
How much worse off is our health service?
How far have educational standards dropped?
Are we really any better off?
Would things have been different if we had never got involved in the first place?

I have a feeling 40 years from now our kids and their kids will be thanking us for getting off a sinking ship early as the EU dies a death and the UK goes from strength to strength and those countries bailing out of Europe will be coming to a stable UK looking for nice deals

Good times ahead.

[jackal2]

So when the Leave campaign said things like there were no downsides to Brexit only upsides and getting a great deal would be the easiest thing in human history they knew they were lying. If you’ve got any examples of where they warned about this disruption that you reckon everyone knew about please link to it.

Campaigning is an adversarial process. The purpose of the 'Remain' campaign was to talk up the benefits of remaining and to highlight the risks of leaving, while the purpose of the 'Leave' campaign was to talk up the benefits of leaving and to challenge the benefits of remaining.

Surely you wouldn't expect the 'Leave' campaign to be highlighting the potential pitfalls of leaving, because that's the Remain campaign's job, and likewise you wouldn't expect 'Remain' to be highlighting the advantages of leaving, because that's the Leave campaign's job.

Inevitably, the passionate and intense nature of campaigning leads to hyperbole, claim and counter-claim on both sides, but that's politics. It's the job of the public to decide which argument they favour. Remain certainly did all they could to highlight the risks of leaving, and the Government spent public money to distribute that message to every household in the country, but in the end the public made their decision.

Its not ‘semantIcs’ to say the Yellowhammer documents were renamed to mislead the public, it’s actual fact. Rosamund Urwin has confirmed this. If there are better scenarios, why hasn’t the government released them?

I think you may have misunderstood what I said above. I'm not the one contending that there are better scenarios. It was your position that the Yellowhammer documents are not the worst case scenario. I'm saying that the Yellowhammer documents - whatever their title - probably do portray the worst case scenario, because civil servants almost always predict the worst in order to demand a big, feather-bedded contingency budget.

I think yours and others anti-EU mania has made you lose your minds. There are no levels of deaths, food shortages, or raised risk of rioting that make what are doing to ourselves worthwhile. Experts in all these fields have made it clear what potentially could happen, for absolutely no good reason.

You're a good poster and debater BFP and I respect that you've got a different view to me on many things, but a lot of your arguments ultimately seem to end with you accusing others of being extremists or "losing their minds" or even being happy to see people to die, none of which seem to be very liberal-minded or tolerant sentiments. In reality, I simply have a different opinion to yours and neither us has the divine right to claim we are correct, and nor should we be condemning the other as a nutcase.

In reality, there's an absolute mass of information around Brexit with good evidential material supporting both Remain and Leave. If there was a de facto "right" or "correct" side to be on, then the whole country wouldn't have spent three years (at least) debating it.

[navypie]

Campaigning is an adversarial process. The purpose of the 'Remain' campaign was to talk up the benefits of remaining and to highlight the risks of leaving, while the purpose of the 'Leave' campaign was to talk up the benefits of leaving and to challenge the benefits of remaining.

Surely you wouldn't expect the 'Leave' campaign to be highlighting the potential pitfalls of leaving, because that's the Remain campaign's job, and likewise you wouldn't expect 'Remain' to be highlighting the advantages of leaving, because that's the Leave campaign's job.

Inevitably, the passionate and intense nature of campaigning leads to hyperbole, claim and counter-claim on both sides, but that's politics. It's the job of the public to decide which argument they favour. Remain certainly did all they could to highlight the risks of leaving, and the Government spent public money to distribute that message to every household in the country, but in the end the public made their decision.



I think you may have misunderstood what I said above. I'm not the one contending that there are better scenarios. It was your position that the Yellowhammer documents are not the worst case scenario. I'm saying that the Yellowhammer documents - whatever their title - probably do portray the worst case scenario, because civil servants almost always predict the worst in order to demand a big, feather-bedded contingency budget.



You're a good poster and debater BFP and I respect that you've got a different view to me on many things, but a lot of your arguments ultimately seem to end with you accusing others of being extremists or "losing their minds" or even being happy to see people to die, none of which seem to be very liberal-minded or tolerant sentiments. In reality, I simply have a different opinion to yours and neither us has the divine right to claim we are correct, and nor should we be condemning the other as a nutcase.

In reality, there's an absolute mass of information around Brexit with good evidential material supporting both Remain and Leave. If there was a de facto "right" or "correct" side to be on, then the whole country wouldn't have spent three years (at least) debating it.

I would go as far as to say that fatlad is a master debater jackal.

[bridpie78]

I would go as far as to say that fatlad is a master debater jackal.

[Elite_Pie]

Jesus wept man ...... you have a knack of twisting words.

What? It was you who tried make a difference between 'lie' and 'mislead'.

[magpie_mania]

Jesus wept man ...... you have a knack of twisting words. Just read Bridpie's post which makes sound common sense, much better than mine I'll concede. I'll repeat that if the Court rule Boris lied OR misled the Queen regarding proroguing, I'll support your comments. Fair enough? ,,,, and will you accept that if he did nothing unlawful in the Court's view and proroguing was legal, would you accept that and pipe down for once, otherwise your arguments are getting childlike ...... keep smiling we'll soon be out, accept being a loser with good grace.

Sound common sense? All the way through his post he says that the reason for proroguing parliament was about the Brexit issue but Boris insists that isn't the case.

So who's lying? Bridpie or Boris?

[bridpie78]

Sound common sense? All the way through his post he says that the reason for proroguing parliament was about the Brexit issue but Boris insists that isn't the case.

So who's lying? Bridpie or Boris?

Of course he's twisting the truth, we all know he's telling little porkie pies and anyone who thinks he isnt is either naive or stupid, but my point was that this is nothing new in parliament , remainers are getting all outraged about this particular one because it suits their agenda on this occasion.
Tbh i'm more outraged that the opposition have absolutely no confidence in Boris to get Brexit done with a satisfactory deal,they claim they know a better way but when offered a GE they all abstained, i can take someone using a shortcut to get a job finished but the hypocrisy from the other side disgusts me.

The sooner this is all over the better,hopefully once we get the EU off our backs maybe we can do something to drag our own grubby little political establishment into the 21st century.

On that note i prorogue myself from any further comment on Brexit until November 1st, i had a vote and it sailed through the house 1 to 0 i don't need to ask the Queen because she doesnt have any power over me, i think i might watch a bit of football till its all over
.